Forest Department, Ministry of Environment, Lithuania Regional Forestry Board of Östra Götaland, Sweden Pilot Woodland Key Habitat Inventory in Lithuania
FINAL REPORT
Leif Andersson, Rimvydas Kriukelis
VILNIUS, 2002 1 Preface
The preservation of biodiversity in Lithuanian forests is one of the tasks of sustainable forestry with its ecological, economic and social dimensions and one of the most important areas in our common efforts to save and keep good environment for future generations. Forests in Lithuania are still rich in biological values. Many species that are threatened in other European countries still have viable populations here.
The forest sector in Lithuania has experienced dramatic changes over the last decade. The foresters have to adapt to operating in active market conditions with immediate decision-making and heavy load of responsibility. A lot of new forest owners with very small forest holdings play also active role in forest economy. These changes condition increased threat to sensible plant and animal species confined to old-growth forests or forests that by historical or geographical reasons are different from managed forests. Such forests inhabiting rare and endangered species and known as Woodland Key Habitats cover today only a few percent of the forest area.
The Lithuanian Forest Authorities recognise that, as formulated by the Helsinki process and various European and international legal documents, maintenance and enhancement of biological diversity is a key element of ecological sustainability in the forests. This is clearly expressed in the Forest Law of the Republic of Lithuania force on 10 April 2001.
Exchange of experience is important in all activities. In 2000 discussions began between Swedish and Lithuanian forest authorities to form a bilateral project in order to get consensus on a definition of Woodland Key Habitats, to develop a methodology and classification system adapted to Lithuanian conditions and to perform a pilot inventory in particular areas.
The project ”Pilot Woodland Key Habitat Inventory in Lithuania” started at the beginning of 2001. A definition of Woodland Key Habitats has been developed, along with an inventory methodology and a classification system. The activities of this project have involved people from different institutions. The foresters, ecologists from protected areas and NGOs have been trained in the methodology and a pilot inventory has been made in a number of forest enterprises, regional parks and national parks.
.This report shows that the methodology presented could be used to detect a large proportion of the Woodland Key Habitats. The methodology could be learned by inventory fieldworkers in a reasonable amount of time. A full-scale inventory of Woodland Key Habitats in all Lithuanian forests is currently being planned to take place the following three years.
We want to express our greatest thanks to all the parties involved for their help in bringing this project idea to its present state.
Bo Thor, Project Manager, Leif Andersson, Operative Project Leader Rimvydas Kriukelis, Local Project Leader 2
Content Page
Preface 1 Content 2 Inventory of Woodland Key Habitats 4 Reading instruction 4 Summary 5
PART 1 Main objectives 8 Background 8 Definitions 11 What is a Woodland Key Habitat? 11 What is not a Woodland Key Habitat? 11 How to find a Woodland Key Habitat? 12 How to Identify a Woodland Key Habitat? 12 Landscape Elements 12 Key Elements 12 Habitat specialists and indicator species 13 Why are Woodland Key Habitats important to find and preserve? 13
PART 2 Methodology development and implementation of pilot study – objectives and performance 14 Implementing of the project 14 Development of an inventory methodology 17 Preparatory work 17 Field work 17 Landscape Elements 17 Key Elements 18 Habitat specialists and indicator species 18 The best management of the biodiversity values 18 Compiling work 18 Inventory staff 19 Training 20 Calibration 21 Examination 21 Evaluation of pilot inventory 22 3
PART 3 Methodology development and implementation of pilot study – achievements, experiences and suggestions 23 Definition of a Woodland Key Habitat 23 Development of an inventory methodology 24 Preparatory work 25 Field work 26 Landscape Elements 26 Key Elements 26 Habitat specialists and indicator species 26 The best management of the biodiversity values 26 Compiling work 27 Inventory staff 27 Training 28 Calibration 28 Examination 28
PART 4 Changes in the methodology after the pilot inventory 29 Changes in definitions 29 Changes in the preparatory work 30 Changes in the field work and compilation work 31
PART 5 Inventory results, estimated costs and additional conclusions 32 The amount of Woodland Key Habitats 32 The size of Woodland Key Habitats 33 The types of Woodland Key Habitats 33 The use of landscape elements and liological elements 34 Indicator species and habitat specialists 35 Accuracy of the pilot study 35 The working pace 36 Costs for a full-scale inventory 37 A decrease in Woodland Key Habitats 37 Additional effects of the project 38 Final conclusions 39
Acknowledgements 39
References 41
Appendix 1 – Inventory of Woodland Key Habitats. Methodology. 4 Pilot Inventory of Woodland Key Habitats
The project ”Pilot Woodland Key Habitat Inventory in Lithuania” started at the beginning of 2001 and now presents its final report. We will from now on in this report call the project ”Inventory of Woodland Key Habitats”. The project is run in co-operation with the Forest Department (former Department of Forests and Protected Areas), the Ministry of Environment in Lithuania and the Regional Forestry Board of Östra Götaland, Sweden. The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency and the Swedish National Board of Forestry have financed Swedish expenses in the project. The Ministry of Environment of Lithuania has financed Lithuanian expenses.
Reflections and suggestions are warmly welcome and should be sent to:
Rimvydas Kriukelis Pilot Woodland Key Habitat Inventory in Lithuania Project A. Juozapaviciaus g. 9 LT-2600 Vilnius Lithuania Phone/Fax: +370-2-709 304 Mobile: +370-87-77268 E-mail: [email protected]
Our grateful thoughts go to everyone who helped in the realisation of the project.
Vilnius 23rd January 2002.
Rimvydas Kriukelis Leif Andersson Forest Department, Ministry of Environment Pro Natura Lithuania contracted by Lithuanian project leader Regional Forestry Board of Östra Götaland, Sweden Swedish project leader
Reading instruction
In part 1 the main objectives and the general background of the project are presented.
In part 2 the objectives and implementation of the various stages of methodology development are described along with the implementation of the pilot inventory. In part 3 the results of the pilot inventory are presented along with experience gained and our suggestions for a full-scale inventory. The sub-headings are the same in parts 2 and 3 to facilitate selective reading.
Part 4 outlines the changes that have been made in the methodology used in the pilot study. 5
In part 5 the inventory results are presented; the number and types of Woodland Key Habitats found during the pilot study are described and the accuracy of the inventory is discussed. The costs of a full-scale inventory are calculated. The rapid decrease in Woodland Key Habitats is also discussed. Some additional effects of the project are also mentioned and acknowledgements made.
Readers with limited time, and less interest in the specific methodology, should read the summary as well as the preface and parts 1 and 5.
In Appendix 1 we present a methodology for a full-scale inventory of Woodland Key Habitats. Summary
In 2001, within the framework of this joint Lithuanian-Swedish project, a definition of Woodland Key Habitats has been developed, along with an inventory methodology and a classification system. Foresters, ecologists from protected areas and NGOs have been trained in the methodology and a pilot inventory has been made in a number of forest enterprises, nine regional parks and three national parks in Lithuania. The aim has been to get various parties with an interest in Lithuanian forests and forestry involved in the process, to make use of the scientific research and field experience that is available, both in Lithuania and elsewhere, and to reach as much common understanding as possible.
A Woodland Key Habitat (WKH) is defined within the framework of the project as: an intact forest area with a high probability of the presence and non-accidental occurrence of an endangered, vulnerable, rare or care-demanding habitat specialist species.
A second term is Potential Woodland Key Habitat (PWKH) which is defined as an area that will soon (within a few decades) become a Woodland Key Habitat, if it is managed in such a way as to promote its biodiversity values. Potential Woodland Key Habitats should not be looked for while preparing the inventory but marked and described when encountered.
The inventory method is: to visit areas selected in advance and assess, by means of a field inventory methodology, whether they fulfil the above-mentioned definitions, to describe the areas on a field inventory sheet and to mark their borders on a map.
The main source of information for picking out the areas to be visited is the forestry database and aerial photos. The field inventory methodology is based mainly on recording the occurrence and number of forest structures (Key Elements) that are valuable for biodiversity, as well as the occurrence and number of species that indicate Woodland Key Habitats. A certain amount of training and frequent calibrations are needed to ensure correct assessment. The field data collected is later stored in a Woodland Key Habitat database, which will be linked to the forestry databases. The WKHs are also digitised for use in GIS-systems.
A relatively high degree of consensus was reached concerning the best management methods for achieving/maintaining high biodiversity values in the different types of Woodland Key Habitats. 6
The pilot inventory was carried out by trained foresters and ecologists in protected areas, and examined with satisfactory results. The inventory was carried out in all forests, regardless of ownership. Also protected forests of all types except strictly protected forests, protection class I, were surveyed.
Altogether, 25 fieldworkers were engaged. The co-ordination work was carried out by the project management team (PMT) and State Institute of Forest Inventory and Management (Lit. VMI). The total area covered by this summer’s work was approximately 237,000 ha which corresponds to 11 % of the Lithuanian forest area. In total 929 WKH’s and 892 PWKH’s were found. This corresponds to an area of 6346 ha and is 3.5% of the forest area. Examination indicates that about 60% of the number of Woodland Key Habitat areas were identified in the pilot inventory. The total area of WKH's in the forests is certainly higher than the areas identified . A more organised use of aerial photos would considerably increase the likelihood of identifying types connected to landscape elements like watercourses, slopes, wetlands, etc. Use of new aerial photos and information about clear felling would also make it unnecessary to visit pre-selected stands, which are clear-cut.
The average size of a (P)WKH was 3,48 ha in the pilot inventory. The largest WKH found was a Pine and birch wetland of 126 ha. The smallest WKH’s were single giant trees.
The WKH database is hosted by the State Institute of Forest Inventory and Management in Kaunas.
The working pace of this pilot inventory including preparatory work, fieldwork , compilation and co-ordination is around 150 ha/day, which is a figure that is estimated to be also valid for a full-scale inventory. On average it was possible to check about 8 pre-selected WKH per day.
The total sum needed for an inventory of all Lithuanian forests, private forests as well as state forests, is calculated at around SEK 13.5 m. All full-scale inventory is expected to take three year with 45-50 field workers. All protected forests will also be surveyed in this inventory.
A rather rapid decrease in WKH’s may be occurring in Lithuania at the moment. Facts that indicates this are:
1. A significant part of WKH’s that were found on state forestland in the pilot areas belong to the areas planned to be clear-felled. This figure may become even higher since additional areas may be planned later.
2. There is a very high level of selective and clear sanitary cutting (1,394,800 m3 for 2000). Sanitary cutting nearly always alters a WKH to a non-WKH.
3. A high level of economic activity in the forest without any knowledge of where the WKH’s are located. 7
The project has come across many stands that have been transformed from WKH’s into non-WKH’s because of sanitary cutting and the intensive use of forest for fuel production by private owners. Former sanitary cutting was the main reason in about half of the cases, that areas located by the search system were no longer WKHs.
Rather a lot of very old stands located by the search system have recently been clear-felled.
Cutting activities in the stand and in adjacent stands counts for 53 % of the negative disturbances in the registered WKHs and PWKHs during the pilot inventory.
Our suggestion for solving the problem of the presumed decrease in Woodland Key Habitats is that:
1. A full-scale inventory of Woodland Key Habitats in all forests regardless of ownership and protection group should be carried out in the coming three years.
2. Woodland Key Habitats that are found should be put into a conservation process in accordance with legal and certification requirements.
3. Training of staff in forest enterprises in the basics of Woodland Key Habitat qualities in forests so they can exempt such stands from any type of cutting when this is planned and be able to make WKH inventory, protection and management.
We also suggest that a plan for building a lasting network of protected forests should be lanced. This should be done in co-ordination with international efforts like Natura2000, Pan-European Biological and landscape Diversity Strategy, Baltic Agenda 21 in Forestry, Baltic Forest Map and also take into account national interests, needs and peculiarities like the development of a protected area system and the creation of Lithuanian Nature Frame and fulfil the obligations of Lithuanian Biodiversity Protection Strategy and Action Plan, Forest Act and Protected Area Act to preserve and maintain forest biodiversity. In such a plan the WKH database would be a useful base of building blocks of biologically valuable cores. However, such a plan is not included in the present project. 8 PART 1 Main objectives
Briefly put, the aims of the project were to develop inventory methods and classifications systems for Woodland Key Habitats in Lithuania, to carry out a pilot inventory of Woodland Key Habitats, to find ways of protecting Woodland Key Habitats and to find ways of financing a full-scale inventory in Lithuania.
One overriding aim has been to incorporate into the project the knowledge and viewpoints of all the different parties with an interest in Lithuanian forests in order to reach as high a degree of consensus as possible on how to carry out the project.
As a result of the project we were hoping to:
1. Reach consensus on a definition of a Woodland Key Habitat and a methodology to be used in an inventory of Woodland Key Habitats.
2. Have a functioning methodology for an inventory of Woodland Key Habitats that has been tested and corrected in the field.
3. Have a good idea of the types of Woodland Key Habitat that exist and their extent.
4. Reach consensus on the current most suitable methods of preserving biodiversity values in different Woodland Key Habitats.
5. Find ways of implementing the Woodland Key Habitats in existing and future forest management plans.
6. Accurately estimate the costs of a full-scale inventory of Woodland Key Habitats in Lithuania and find possible financing sources.
Background
Forestry and forestry products are of great socio-economic importance to Lithuania. An important part of the country’s net export income is attributable to forestry. Lithuanian authorities have signed and ratified the Rio Declaration of Biodiversity. The Lithuanian Forest Authorities recognise that, as formulated by the Helsinki Process, maintenance and enhancement of biological diversity are key elements of ecological sustainability in the Lithuanian forests. This has been formulated in the Lithuanian Forest Law.
A means of preserving forest areas with high biodiversity values is to define, identify and protect Woodland Key habitats.
Ecolabelling (certifying) systems for forest products are being developed on both national and international levels. A central factor in ecolabelling is the preservation of biodiversity. An inventory of the location of existing biodiversity values would help meet market demands for green forest products. 9
Many forest species in northern Europe and Lithuania are more or less threatened due to a lack of the following features:
1. Old and dying trees of different species, 2. Coarse woody debris of different size, age, exposition and tree species, 3. Long continuity of a certain type, for example spruce wetland forests with long continuity of tree cover and high humidity.
The high level of biodiversity of the Lithuanian forests is widely renowned. Many species that are threatened in much of Europe still have viable populations here.
The total forest cover in Lithuania is ca 2.1 million ha. In about 28.6% of the this forest there is some kind of protection or restricted management. The forests with restricted forest management are divided in three management classes; the first group – 1.6% of the total forest area (strictly protected forests), the second and third group – 13% and 14% respectively. The biological values in these forests are not fully known. In most of these areas, selective and sanitary cutting are allowed, and the old and dying trees and coarse woody debris are removed. In the 1.6% of strictly protected forests these activities are prohibited. Forest without particular restrictions belongs to a fourth category. National parks and regional parks cover 91,632 ha and 200,014 ha of forest respectively. Forests occupy 63 % of the total national park area and 48 % of the regional parks. These protected areas comprise forests of all four management classes.
Sanitary cutting is a very serious threat to biodiversity in Lithuania. A total of 207,337 ha were subject to sanitary cutting during the year 2000. A total volume of 1,293,200 cubic meters was cut. To this can be added 947 ha that were clear-cut for sanitary reasons, the yielding volume for year 2000 was 139,700 cubic meters. Although an economically important activity it is important to identify stands where these activities should be avoided from a biodiversity point of view.
Due to forest history and other reasons, very high biodiversity values are to be found at ”hot spots” in the forests areas, or habitats, where the biodiversity is extraordinarily high. These Woodland Key Habitats (WKH), constitute only a small percentage of the forest area, but contain a high proportion of the biodiversity present in a landscape when it comes to rare or threatened species. Knowing their location helps in maintaining a large amount of biodiversity in a cost-effective way.
Preservation of biodiversity in the Woodland Key Habitats should not be seen as the final and only measure needed to preserve biodiversity in forest landscapes. The amount of WKH’s might not be large enough to sustainably preserve biodiversity. Several species need areas ranging from 100 to 10 000 ha to maintain viable populations. Many specialised species need large-scale disturbances for survival, for example fire-dependent species. Other species need a more scattered forest quality, not connected to continuous areas or habitats. Many of them are probably well preserved by an adaptation of ordinary forestry. For example, threatened beetles, dependent on sun-exposed, biologically old pines, are probably well preserved by leaving old pines on ordinary clear-fellings. 10
The Woodland Key Habitats are like islands in a matrix of what, for many habitat specialists, is unsuitable forest. In order to preserve these species in sustainable populations in the future, it may be necessary to construct a network of dispersal pathways and complementary areas between the Woodland Key Habitats. This is often called Ecological Landscape Planning.
The Woodland Key Habitats can also be seen as important building blocks in the construction of a network of protected areas aimed to preserve forest biodiversity for future generations. The design of such a network is not included in the objectives of this project.
The result of the Woodland Key Habitat inventory is meant to provide a source of information for use in devising policies and making decisions about management of the forest. 11 Definitions What is a Woodland Key Habitat? A habitat is a rather homogenous area inhabited by specific animals, fungi and plants.
A Woodland Key Habitat is interpreted and defined by this project as: An intact forest area with a high probability of the presence and non-accidental occurrence of an endangered, vulnerable, rare or care-demanding habitat specialist species. The habitat specialist species are as a rule listed in the Lithuanian Red Data Book (red-listed habitat specialist species). Within this project, species that fulfil the criteria for recording, but which for practical reasons have not yet been recorded in the Red Data Book, for example some fungi and crustaceous lichens, are treated as red-listed. A high probability of their occurrence is sufficient for an area to be assessed as a WKH.
The occurrence of a red-listed species which is not a habitat specialist species, and which is not dependent on a certain quality or history of the forest and is merely growing by chance, does not qualify an area as a WKH. This is the case with some red-listed vascular plants and some species on the borders of their distribution range. Woodland Key Habitats are distinguished from other habitats by their valuable features, for example very old trees, a lot of coarse woody debris or a certain forest history. There is no limit to the size of a Woodland Key Habitat; the term denotes the quality of the forest. A Woodland Key Habitat can be anything from a single, very large oak to a forest area of many hectares.
Natural forest streams may, according to the definition, be Woodland Key Habitats. This means that the stream itself may be a Woodland Key Habitat even though the forest alongside the stream is not. . It is not possible to evaluate whether a stream is a Woodland Key Habitat by using the methodology in this project. Natural forest streams are therefore excluded from the project. We suggest that a special project be run to develop a methodology to assess limnological values.
What is not a Woodland Key Habitat? An area where a threatened species lives merely at random is not a Woodland Key Habitat. For example, a rare vascular plant may sometimes show up in an unexpected place, where it is not possible to say from the structure or history of the forest why it grows there. Even if the area is not a Woodland Key Habitat, treating the surrounding forest area according to the demands of the particular plant should preserve these plants. 12
Threatened species that demand a more scattered forest quality, not connected to continuous areas or habitats cannot be used as a definition of a Woodland Key Habitat. For example, the white-backed woodpecker (Dendrocopos leucotos) needs a certain amount of dying or dead deciduous trees, to feed from, within its home range. The deciduous trees don’t necessarily have to be located at one place, in a Woodland Key Habitat, but may well be scattered throughout the landscape. Preserving Woodland Key Habitats only probably cannot protect this woodpecker, but leaving a large enough amount of dying and dead deciduous trees in the forest in general may protect it. The creation of large reserves with old deciduous forests will also contribute to the survival of such species. Animals with large home ranges often fall into this category.
How to find a Woodland Key Habitat? It is not cost-effective to survey the whole forest area for Woodland Key Habitats. The field survey must be limited to areas found during preparatory work and the field survey. The most important source of information for preparatory work is the Forestry database at the Lithuanian Forest Inventory and Management institute and aerial photos. In the Forestry database old stands are selected with different ages depending on tree composition. On aerial photos stands with old trees in the canopy, stands along natural streams, stands with mosaic structure from old land use or caused by edaphic conditions, etc are searched for.
How to identify a Woodland Key Habitat in the forest? Landscape Elements Landscape Elements are visually detectable objects or features of topography, hydrology and land use which delimit some coherence of natural and cultural processes and activities, and which may indicate a higher probability of ecological preconditions for Woodland Key Habitats. These features are often well identified on aerial photos. Though their biological value has to be assessed in the fieldwork.
Key Elements Research has shown that most threatened species have specific ecological requirements. There are certain features and locations in a habitat, which are required by different habitat specialists. These features and locations are called Key Elements. Key Elements are rather easy to identify with a little practice. Examples are: biologically old trees, fallen trees of various types, stools, trees with holes, dead standing trees and tall natural snags. The Key Elements serve as good indicators when Woodland Key Habitats are being surveyed. 13
Habitat specialists and indicator species Additionally, indicator species and habitat specialists are used when an area is assessed as a WKH. Indicator species are not as sensitive as habitat specialists are, and their existence is not threatened by forestry practices in Lithuania. A good indicator species is easy to identify, not too rare, and indicates a certain biological quality of the forest; mostly long continuity of a certain type. Many of the indicator species have low dispersal ability and therefore indicate, merely by their existence, long continuity of a certain type. For example, the lichens Sclerophora nivea and Arthonia byssacea, which often grow on ash stems, indicate a long continuity of tree cover and moist conditions. If they are found, especially in larger numbers, it is an indication that the area has not been clear-felled for a long time. If the area has not been clear-felled for a long time, and contains a certain number of Key Elements, it probably hosts habitat specialists, and is therefore a Woodland Key Habitat by definition.
Different kinds of Key Elements and different indicator species are to be found in different Woodland Key Habitats. An area is not a Woodland Key Habitat merely because one indicator species has been found; an overall assessment always has to be made. In some habitats, for example dry pine habitats, few indicator species can be found. Many habitat specialists may exist though, mostly wood-inhabiting beetles, which are difficult to find during a short visit or in an unsuitable season, and the assessment must be made on the basis of Key Elements only.
Why are Woodland Key Habitats important to find and preserve? Woodland Key Habitats do not occur at random in the forest; there are always reasons for the existence of a Woodland Key Habitat in a particular location. These reasons are in most cases related to the history of the area, landscape elements and sometimes to the site conditions. Several different threatened species may often be found within the same Woodland Key Habitat, but not at all in the surrounding forest. A Woodland Key Habitat is often sensitive to dramatic changes in management, or lack of management, that gave rise to a Woodland Key Habitat. The quality of a Woodland Key Habitat usually takes a considerable time to restore, if destroyed. The clear-felling of a spruce wetland forest with long continuity could well be called an irreversible step on a human time-scale.
For these reasons Woodland Key Habitats are important cornerstones in the protection of the biodiversity of the forest; it is therefore important to know where Woodland Key Habitats are located in order to avoid unfortunate mistakes and to preserve biodiversity in the most cost-effective way. 14 PART 2 Methodology development and implementation of pilot inventory - objectives and performance
Implementing the project The first discussions and planning of this project took place in a week of meetings and workshops between representatives from the Regional Forestry Board of Östra Götaland, Sweden and Lithuanian representatives from different institutions and authorities in November 2000.
A preliminary agreement to start the project between the responsible Lithuanian and Swedish institutions was undertaken in the beginning of 2001.
Since training and the inventory work in this project is very dependent on the seasons it was also decided in the beginning of 2001 to start the preparations for the project immediately to avoid missing a season of fieldwork.
The Swedish manager of the project has been Bo Thor, Regional Forestry Board of Östra Götaland, Sweden.
The Swedish operative project leader has been Leif Andersson, Pro Natura, contracted by the County Forestry Board of Östra Götaland, Sweden.
Rimvydas Kriukelis, Vilnius was assigned as theLithuanian project leader .
The State Institute of Forest Inventory and Management (Lit. VMI) was both the administrative centre and operationally responsible for the inventory work Leandras Deltuva was the co-ordinator at VMI until 1st October, 2001 and VMI ecological expert Saulis Skuja – from 1st October.
The work to elaborate a functioning methodology for Lithuania started on 6th February, 2001. However, the agreement between the Department of Forests and Protected Areas under the Ministry of Environment, Lithuania, and the Regional Forestry Board, Östra Götaland, Sweden, was formally signed and the project officially started on 15th March, 2001.
A working group responsible for the development of the methodology was formed in February, 2001 consisting of:
Rimvydas Kriukelis, Local project leader Leif Andersson, Operative project leader, Pro Natura, Sweden Paulius Zolubas, Lithuanian Forest Research Institute (until May 2001) Silvija Šaudytė, Lithuanian Forest Research Institute Leandras Deltuva, Forest Inventory and Management Institute Saulis Skuja, Forest Inventory and Management Institute Jurga Motiejūnaitė, Institute of Botany Raimondas Čiuplys, Institute of Botany Darius Stončius, Lithuanian Nature Fund (from December 2001) 15
Biologists specialised in different organism groups participated in the work of establishing lists of Indicator species and Habitat Specialists species for the inventory. These specialists were:
Raimondas Čiuplys, vascular plants Reda Iršėnaitė, wood inhabiting fungi Ilona Jukonienė, bryophytes Ernestas Kutorga, ground living fungi Jurga Motiejūnaitė, lichens Daiva Patalauskaitė, vascular plants Grita Skujienė, molluscs Bronius Šablevičius, beetles Vytautas Tamutis, beetles Vincentas Urbonas, ground living fungi
A number of excursions to different parts of Lithuania were carried out in the middle of February (10th – 16th) in order to find suitable areas for the training courses and to get an overview of Lithuanian forest types and habitat types. These excursions were made together with staff from the Institute of Botany, Vilnius and members of the Lithuanian Nature Fund.
The English version of the methodology was completed and approved by the working group 15th March, 2001.
The Lithuanian version was translated, approved and printed 30th March, 2001.
The Advisory board for the project was established with members representing different institutions:
Representative from General forest enterprise (will be appointed) Donatas Dudutis, Head of the Forest Economy Development Division, the Forest Department (former Forest and Protected Areas Department) Sigitas Mozgeris, Chief Specialist, Division of’ Forest Inventory, Management and Resources, the Forest Department (former Forest and Protected Areas' Department) Gintaras Venckus, Chief Specialist, Division of’ Forest Inventory, Management and Resources, the Forest Department (former Division of Protected Areas' Strategy and Planning, Forest and Protected Areas' Department) Jonas Augustauskas, Chief Specialist, Division of Biological Diversity, the Nature Protection Department, the Ministry of Environment Andrius Kuliešis, Director of the State Institute of Forest Inventory and Management Romas Pakalnis, Director of the Institute of Botany Rimantas Ozolinčius, Director of the Lithuanian Forest Institute Juozas Virbickas, Director of the Institute of Ecology. Ričardas Baubinas, Director of the Institute of Geography Rimantas Survila, Deputy director of the State Land Survey Institute Edmundas Bartkevičius, Dean of the Forest Faculty, Lithuanian Agricultural University Rimvydas Tamulaitis, President of the Regional Park Association Rimantas Braziulis, Chairman of the Lithuanian Green Movement, Pranas Mierauskas, Chairman of the Lithuanian Nature Fund Petras Kurlavičius, Chairman of the Lithuanian Ornithological Society 16
Stasys Mizaras, the Lithuanian Forest Owner Association Jonas Vyšniauskas, the Lithuanian Hunter Society Antanas Morkevičius, Chairman of the Association "Lietuvos mediena" (“Lithuanian Wood”) Representative from UAB “Stora Enso Miškas” (will be appointed)
This group had its first meeting on 6th April, 2001, a second meeting on 31st October and a third meeting on 13th December, 2001. All present participants have firmly supported the project.
The steering Committee for the project was formally appointed on 17th September, 2001 and the first meeting took place on 16th October, 2001.
Albertas Vasiliauskas, Vice-minister of Environment, Chairman Bo Libert, SEPA, Sweden Valdas Vaičiūnas, Director of the Forest Department, Ministry of Environment (Head of former Forest and Protected Areas' Department under the Ministry of Environment), Lithuania Laimutis Budrys, Director of the Nature Protection Department, Ministry of Environment, Lithuania Donatas Dudutis, Head of the Forest Economy Development Division, the Forest Department, (former Forest and Protected Areas' Department), Lithuania Eduardas Vaitkevičius, Head of the Division of Protection and Management of protected areas (former Division of State Parks and Strict Nature Reserves, Forest and Protected Areas Department) Sigitas Mozgeris, Chief Specialist, the Division of’ Forest Inventory, Management and Resources, the Forest Department (former Forest and Protected Areas' Department), Lithuania
The second meeting of the Steering committee also took place on 6th February, 2002.
The people mentioned in the acknowledgements have been personally consulted at least once and usually several times. All the fieldworkers have contributed with comments and feedback during the whole project period.
Information about the project's activities was shared during the co-ordination meeting held in the Department of Forests and Protected Areas, 17th October, 2001. The representatives from the Ministry of Environment, the Department of Forests and Protected Areas and project managers from other international projects focusing on the forestry sector participated in this Meeting.
An informative course has been arranged for the heads of the Forest Enterprises and for personnel at the Forest Department of the Environmental Ministry. The course was held on 30th October in Birštonas.
The environmental telecast “Sustok, gamta” (“Stop, Nature”) has made a TV film about projects supported by Sweden carried out in Lithuania. The project leader, Rimvydas Kriukelis and the ecologist Vidas Gramauskas from Aukštadvaris RP have been asked to describe the activities of the WKH inventory project and to 17 show examples of concrete sites in Aukštadvaris RP for this TV film. The film was shown twice on National Public Television.
Leandras Deltuva, co-ordinator at VMI, has written a short informative article about the WKH inventory “Ieškos vertingiausių buveinių” (“We are going to find most valuable habitats”) for the biggest Lithuanian daily newspaper Lietuvos rytas, 7th September 2001, No. 209.
Another article, “Kertines miško buveines aplankius” (“After visiting woodland key habitats”) was written by Silvija Šaudytė and Jonas Grigaliūnas for the journal Mūsų Girios (Our forest), July, 2001, Nr. 7(639), 10 p. Information on the WKH inventory was also presented in the article "Sieksime kokybės miškotvarkoje" (“We will seek the quality in forest inventory”) written by Algirdas Rutkauskas in the same journal.
In December, 2001 Saulis Skuja has presented for publishing the article for the newspaper Valstiečių laikraštis (“Farmers newspaper”).
Some information was also distributed through different media by the participants of the course on WKH inventories in Lithuania, Birštonas, 30th October, for the head officials of the forest sector.
Development of an inventory methodology The purpose was to develop a methodology based on scientific methods and field experience from similar inventories in Estonia, Latvia, Sweden and other northern European countries.
Preparatory work The main source of information for finding areas to visit was expected to be the Forestry database at the State Institute of Forest Inventory and Management (Lit. VMI) and aerial photos. A search system using the database was developed. Leandras Deltuva at the State Institute of Forest Inventory and Management (Lit. VMI) made the computer program for the search. It was not possible to use the aerial photos in all enterprises so they were, to some extent, replaced by the use of ortophoto maps. Coloured aerial photos of one sort or another cover 50 percent of Lithuania and black and white aerial photos most other parts. Ortophoto maps with new and rectified black and white aerial photos cover Lithuania almost entirely.. Ortophoto maps covering the enterprises and protected areas to be inventoried during 2001 were distributed to the surveyors.
Other sources we thought might be useful were topographical maps and the knowledge of local foresters. (See also Appendix 1.)
Field work It was agreed at an early stage that the field inventory methodology should be based both on species that indicate Woodland Key Habitats and on forest structures valuable for biodiversity, known as Key Elements.
Landscape Elements Saulis Skuja and Leandras Deltuva at the State Institute of Forest Inventory and Management (Lit. VMI) together with Jurga Motiejūnaitė and Raimondas Čiuplys, 18 from the Institute of Botany, Vilnius, developed the list of Landscape elements. The field form from the Estonian Woodland Key Habitat inventory was used as a template.
Key Elements The list of Key Elements was developed mainly on the basis of experience from earlier inventories in Estonia, Latvia and Sweden. It is adapted to Lithuanian conditions by Paulius Zolubas and Silvija Saudyte, Lithuanian Forest Research Institute, Kaunas, together with Jurga Motiejūnaitė and Raimondas Čiuplys from the Institute of Botany, Vilnius.
Habitat specialists and indicator species The lists of Habitat Specialists and Indicator Species (see Appendix 1) are based on field experience and current knowledge of the ecology of these species in Lithuania but also from experience accumulated from similar projects in Estonia, Latvia, Sweden and other northern European countries. The lists of polypores and other macrofungi, lichens, bryophytes, vascular plants and molluscs are mainly based on knowledge and investigations in Lithuania. There is less Lithuanian knowledge on some organism groups , like beetles, and the lists are accordingly to a greater extent based on foreign inventories and investigations.
Some of the literature used to develop these lists is included in the reference list in appendix 1.
The best management of the biodiversity values Traditionally nature conservation workers have regarded all human influence as negative to the preservation of biodiversity values. That was particularly the case where forest ecosystems were concerned. The untouched climax forests were the ideal for all nature protection. Management plans for nature reserves of tree- covered areas were constantly recommending free development, no management at all. Studies of forest dynamics and evolutionary adaptations have revealed the fact that many species in the forest ecosystems depend on disturbances of some sort. Many of the human disturbances induced by old agriculture like cattle grazing and mowing made it possible for many species adapted to grazed open and semiopen landscape to survive. But studies of forest dynamics also demonstrated that many forest types in fact should be left without any management to preserve biodiversity. And of course old trees and coarse woody debris are always important for preserving biodiversity values connected to trees.
This dynamic, diversified and more site-adapted view of how to optimise biodiversity values has been quite easy to introduce among foresters. They know, through their own experience as foresters, a great deal about differences in dynamics, and the reactions of different tree species to disturbances etc.
Compiling work An Access application was developed for entering data into a Woodland Key Habitat database. Albertas Garbinčius, Andrius Juodis and Kristina Svirbutavičiūtė at the State Institute of Forest Inventory and Management (VMI) developed this application. The data is entered by staff at VMI. The data are linked to The Forestry database at VMI which makes it possible to find out which sitesincuding their size, are identified as Woodland Key Habitats. The digitising of the delineated WKHs is also made at VMI. 19
Inventory staff It was advantageous to use interested foresters at the State Institute of Forest Inventory and Management (VMI) and other foresters as inventory staff for the following reasons:
1. They already have a basic knowledge of forest dynamics. 2. They are experienced surveyors. 3. They are aware of the current situation in the forests. 4. A general desire to increase awareness of biodiversity matters within the forestry sector should make it easier to handle difficult biodiversity questions internally. Some of the acquired knowledge will probably spread from the inventory staff to their colleagues.
It was also desirable to use experienced ecologists for the fieldwork in order to get appropriate responses for the improvement of the methodology. A number of responsible ecologists from the National Parks and Regional Parks carried out a substantial part of the fieldwork.
To acquire an independent group of fieldworkers capable of auditing, the inventory work staff from the Lithuanian Nature Fund and from the Lithuanian Forest Research Institute were trained and each were required to carry out at least one month of ordinary field work.
The fieldwork in the pilot project was spread out in different parts of Lithuania. It was carried out in Biržai forest enterprise (including Biržai RP), Panevėžys forest enterprise (including Krekenava RP), Dubrava forest enterprise, Aukštaitija National Park, Žemaitija National Park, Dzūkija National Park, Anykščiai Regional Park, Aukštadvaris Regional Park, Kauno Marios Regional Park, Meteliai Regional Park, Nemuno kilpos Regional Park, Tytuvėnai Regional Park and Sartai Regional Park.
The following people carried out the pilot inventory:
Biržai forest enterprise including Biržai Regional Park Saulis Skuja, VMI Vaidotas Grigaliūnas, VMI
Panevėžys forest enterprise Virginijus Mikštas, VMI Antanas Lankelis, VMI Leandras Deltuva, VMI
Krekenava Regional Park (Panevėžys forest enterprise) Julius Auglys, Krekenava RP
Dubrava forest enterprise Jonas Grigaliūnas, VMI 20
Aukštaitija National Park Valdas Danilevičius, Aukštaitija NP Asta Survilaitė, Aukštaitija NP Darius Norkūnas, Lithuanian Nature Fund
Žemaitija National Park Maria Jankauskienė, Žemaitija NP Jonas Šečkus, Žemaitija NP
Dzūkija National Park Mindaugas Lapelė, Dzūkija NP Arūnas Venčius, Dzūkija NP
Anykščiai Regional Park (Anykščiai forest enterprise) Rasa Rutkauskienė, Anykščiai RP
Aukštadvaris Regional Park (Trakai forest enterprise) Vidas Gramauskas, Aukštadvaris RP Darius Stončius, the Lithuanian Nature Fund Rimgaudas Treinys, the Lithuanian Nature Fund
Kauno Marios Regional Park (Dubrava forest enterprise and Kaišiadorys forest enterprise) Povilas Vitkauskas, Kauno Marios RP Silvija Šaudytė, the Lithuanian Forest Research Institute
MeteliaiRegional Park (Veisiejai forest enterprise and Alytus forest enterprise) Žydrūnas Sinkevičius, Meteliai RP
Nemuno Kilpos Regional Park (Prienai forest enterprise and Alytus forest enterprise) Žydrūnas Preikša, Kauno Marios RP
Tytuvėnai Regional Park (Tytuvėnai forest enterprise) Simonas Stašaitis, Tytuvėnai RP
Sartai Regional Park (Zarasai forest enterprise) Daiva Trainytė, Sartai RP
Training The first training course in the methodology for the inventory staff was given in southwest Lithuania around Birštonas between 2nd-5th April, 2001. This course focused to a large extent on stands of deciduous forests.
The second course concentrated on the interpretation of aerial photos and the preparatory work in general. This course was organised in Tauragė between 9th-11th April, 2001.
The third course was given in and around the National Park Aukštaitijos between 14th-17th May. This course concentrated on coniferous forests and stand types with an origin in the old agricultural landscape. 21
Training was based on problem-based learning in field situations. The staff were taughtto assess whether, and why, an area is a Woodland Key Habitat, a Potential Woodland Key Habitat or neither, and what the best form of management is from a biodiversity point of view. Special attention was paid to two kinds of stands: stands that are difficult to assess and stands with a lot of indicator species, the second kind in order to learn to recognise as many indicator species and habitat specialists as possible.
Leif Andersson compiled the training program for the inventory staff with assistance from the Institute of Botany, Vilnius and Rimvydas Kriukelis.
The following project experts participated during the training courses:
Leandras Deltuva, the Forest Inventory and Management Institute Reda Iršenaitė, the Institute of Botany Ilona Jukonienė, the Institute of Botany Jurga Motiejūnaitė, the Institute of Botany Daiva Patalauskaitė, the Institute of Botany Saulis Skuja, the Forest Inventory and Management Institute Bronius Šablevičius, Aukštaitija National Park
Calibration After some weeks of fieldwork, regional training activities – calibration – were carried out in Biržai, Panevėžys and Dubrava forest enterprises and Dzūkija National Park between 25th-29th June, 2001. Field workers from adjacent territories also participated. The field workers then presented particular problems found in their region to which the methodology could be applied . The project leaders introduced the project activities in all forest enterprises and Dzūkija National Park. The managing staff of forest enterprises actively participated during the calibration days.
The result of these calibration days showed that the field workers had well understood and implemented the methodology and training could be devoted to fine-tuning the dealing with of particular Lithuanian and regional problems. A summary of the conclusions made during the calibration days was distributed to all field workers.
Examination The inventory was examined (audited) in October and November, 2001 in Biržai, Panevėžys and Dubravos enterprises as well as Dzūkija National Park. 31 blocks (forest compartments) of approximately 100 ha each were investigated covering an area of 3393,8 ha. The purpose was to find out how well the preparatory work and field inventory methodology was working. The audit was performed by Darius Stončius, Rimgaudas Treinys, Darius Norkūnas (Lithuanian Nature Fund) and Silvija Šaudytė (Lithuanian Forest Research Institute). 22
The method used was that the examiner, without knowing the inventory results, started from one end of the block area, visited all stands in the block and marked the Woodland Key Habitats and Potential Woodland Key Habitats that he found on a map. The result was then compared with the pilot inventory results. In most blocks one or more stands were pre-selected by the datasearch in the forestry database and were thereby visited by both the ordinary surveyors and the control inventory staff. In 7 % of the blocks no stands were pre-selected in the data search of the forestry database.
As mentioned before, marking the borders of Woodland Key Habitats on the map may sometimes be difficult. In a case when the inventory staff and the examiner certainly did mean the same area, and marked it using the same size and shape, but at slightly different places on the map, the area has been considered to be correctly assessed.
Evaluation of pilot inventory To get a maximal response from the surveyors on the inventory methodology a meeting with all fieldworkers was organised on 12th of December, 2001.
The methodology group analysed the result of the pilot inventory during the period of December 2001 to January 2002 and proposed additions and changes to the methodology.
Proposals were also given at the meeting with the Advisory board on 13th of December, 2001
All these meetings, seminars and the work carried out by the methodology group formed the base for the final proposal for changes in methodology. 23 PART 3 Methodology development and implementation of pilot study - achievements, experience and suggestions
Definition of a Woodland Key Habitat A Woodland Key Habitat is interpreted and defined by this project as: An intact forest area with a high probability of the presence and non-accidental occurrence of an endangered, vulnerable, rare or care-demanding habitat specialist species.
The habitat specialist species are as a rule listed in the Lithuanian Red Data Book (red-listed habitat specialists). Within this project, species that fulfil the criteria for recording, but which for practical reasons have not yet been recorded in the Red Data Book, for example numerous fungi and crustaceous lichens, are treated as red- listed.
A high probability that a habitat specialist species exists is a sufficient criterion for designating an area as a Woodland Key Habitat” means that it is not necessary to find a habitat specialist before an area can be assessed as a WKH. The time and knowledge needed to find the existing habitat specialists in every case make this an impossible task. Instead, a well-founded expectation, based on the earlier findings and experience of habitat specialists, will be enough. The right level must be set during training and calibration.
In borderline areas, later checking could take place using thorough investigation methods, for example insect trapping, to find out whether habitat specialists do actually occur in the habitat. Realistically, this checking can only take place in a few cases, to adjust assessments to the correct level. It should be noted that many more habitat specialists exist than those mentioned in the lists of indicator species and habitat specialists, especially as regards insects and fungi. A well-founded expectation that any of these exists is sufficient criterion to designate an area as a WKH. WKH’s should be assessed according to the present-day situation.
Woodland Key Habitats are distinguished from other habitats by their valuable features, for example very old trees, a lot of coarse woody debris, different types of landscape elements or a certain forest history. 24
There is an exception to the above-mentioned definition. An area with a habitat specialist is not a WKH:
• If the biodiversity values in an area has recently been severely damaged (for example by sanitary cutting) and a non-sustainable residual population of a habitat specialist still survives. • If the habitat specialist clearly shows up merely ”by accident” in an area which in no way resembles a WKH.
A habitat specialist may occasionally be found in ”normal” forest with no other biodiversity qualities, and we think that the definition should not be so rigid that a find of this nature qualifies the stand as a WKH. This will happen in very few cases and the above-mentioned exception should be used in these cases and no others. If a species considered to be a habitat specialist shows up many times in ”normal” forest, outside normal WKH’s, it is not a habitat specialist and should be removed from the habitat specialist list.
There is no limit to the size of a Woodland Key Habitat; the term denotes the quality of the forest. A Woodland Key Habitat can be anything from a single, very large oak to a forest area of many hectares.
An area that will soon (within a few decades) become a Woodland Key Habitat, if it is managed in such a way as to promote its biodiversity values is called a “Potential Woodland Key Habitat” (PWKH). These areas should not be looked for when the inventory is prepared but marked and described when encountered.
Development of an inventory methodology The Woodland Key Habitat types are classified in three main groups. In one group the criteria for whether a stand is a WKH or not is based on traditional old-growth characteristics like stand age, freedom of human impact and the occurrence of coarse woody debris. These features are expressed in different types of Key Elements. Landscape Elements are only exceptionally crucial for the assessment.
The second Woodland Key Habitat types are connected to and named by the presence of Landscape Elements in or close to the stand. These Landscape Elements are watercourses, water surfaces, mires, slopes, etc.
The third group of types are formed by older land use such as wooded meadows, wooded pastures and old parks or by special disturbances like forest fire. The stand history is the main reason why these stands have WKH values. In the latter two types of WKH’s traditional criteria (Key Elements, Habitat Specialists) of old- growth qualities also determine whether an area is a WKH or not. But Landscape Elements like rock outcrops, sources, dunes, traces of fires etc. may, when well developed, alone be sufficient for classifying a site as a WKH. 25
Preparatory work 85 % of the WKHs that were found during the Woodland Key Habitat inventory were found by searching the forestry database. 9 % of the registered WKH’s were found at random during fieldwork. That clearly indicates the need for better preparatory work. We are convinced that in a full-scale inventory coloured or black-and-white aerial photos or orto-photo maps must be used much more and in a more organised way to achieve a satisfactory result. The control inventory also shows that site types most easily discovered by the use of aerial photos were over represented among the missing WKHs. Despite training in the use of aerial photos they were used only in occasionally during this pilot inventory. The main reason why they were not used was simply that the time needed for organising the interpretation of the aerial photos and doing this preparatory work was too short in 2001. Other sources for finding WKH’s amounted to less than 10%.
Woodland Key Habitat types not related to Landscape Elements are probably best found by searching the forestry database ”Forest fund”. Types related to Landscape Elements are, on the other hand, best found using aerial photos. A combination of both methods will without doubt provide the best preparatory work.
One problem is that the information in the forestry database is sometimes wrong or old. Thus there is a risk that WKHs will not be found using the search criteria. The extent of this problem is unknown to us, but it has been randomly observed a considerable number of times during the project. Old data in the forestry database means a greater risk that stands are clear-cut or have been subject to sanitary cutting. Aerial photos more recent than data in the forest database will provide a means of checking whether pre-selected stands are clear-cut or not.
In Forest Enterprises and protected areas where the work was completed during 2001 5888 pre-selected plots were visited. Of them 1462 or 25 % were either WKHs or PWKHs in areas where all pre-selected stands have been inventoried. The figures are slightly lower (20 %) in the Forest Enterprises (Biržai, Panėvežys and Dubrava including Biržai RP and Krekenava RP) and significantly higher in the National Parks (52 %). In Dzūkija NP (not completed) and the Regional Parks (Anykščiai, Aukštadvaris, Kauno Marios (completed), Meteliai, Nemuno Kilpos, Tytuvėnai and Sartai) the figures are 69 % and 26 %, respectively. The reasons why pre-selected stands did not fulfil the Woodland Key Habitat criteria were the following: recent cutting activities, especially sanitary cutting, outdated forestry data or aerial photos, pre-selection did not include information on felling, etc.
The result of the use of the search criteria has to be considered rather satisfying in comparison with the use of the forestry databases for the same purpose in Sweden and the other Baltic states. To improve efficiency the search criteria in the forestry database will be changed slightly, on the basis of experience from the pilot study and the examination, so that a larger proportion of the WKHs may be found (see below). 26
Field work The field inventory methodology has proved to work well. Some changes have, however, been suggested (see below). It is natural that knowledge on indicator species and habitat specialists will vary among the fieldworkers. The result shows convincingly that the surveyors use both the structure of the forest, biological elements, landscape elements as well as species as tools to assess biological values. The knowledge of indicator species and habitat specialists will increase with experience and the basis for assessing the stands will be even better.
Landscape Elements The fieldworkers have understood the concept of Landscape Elements well. Some additions to the list of Landscape Elements will be made for the final methodology. Some of these have been suggested by the fieldworkers themselves.
Key Elements The Key Elements have proved to work well and no major changes are suggested. It is important to stress that only some of the valuable structures have been chosen as Key Elements in order to speed up the inventory. It must be understood that other valuable structures should also be considered when an area is assessed. Some changes have been suggested by the fieldworkers.
Habitat specialists and indicator species Knowledge of the situation for many of these species in Lithuania is under rapid growth. Experience from the pilot inventory shows that the species on the lists seem to be correctly assessed in most cases. Some registrations of more difficult and small-sized species may need further investigation to confirm identification. Future field experience will possibly suggest changes to the lists. A lot of species will probably be added to the lists, especially insects, and a few will be removed. Some changes and other proposals have been suggested by the fieldworkers.
The best management of the biodiversity values It is suggested that the best management of the biodiversity values should be individually described for every single WKH and PWKH. No economic or other matters should be considered here; the management described should only be for the improvement of the biodiversity values, and not for economic benefits. In some cases the management described may even cost money. The inventory should only be seen as a survey of a natural resource. It is a political decision what to do with the WKHs and this issue should not be mixed into the inventory. The idea is that the inventory staff should be skilled enough to make balanced suggestions as regards the most appropriate management in order to preserve and increase biodiversity values within the different WKHs and PWKHs. Some general advice about management is given under each WKH type in the methodology, but a competent assessment can only be made in the field, in the specific stand, by skilled inventory staff. Training and calibration are needed for good assessments. 27
During training and calibration, open and constructive discussion of these matters was common. In our opinion the inventory staff are already making well-founded and consistent assessments of the best management for biodiversity. In the beginning there was sometimes a tendency to take economic considerations into account when comments were written under this heading on the field sheet, even though this was not the intention. The reason why this should be avoided must frequently be stressed during training and calibration, to drum it into the inventory staff.
Compiling work The boundaries of the WKHs were redrawn on ortophoto maps and sent to VMI for digitising. Many of the WKHs were delineated on copies of forest maps and other maps. It was not possible to use these maps for proper digitising.
The filled field forms were also sent to VMI for entering and storage in a database. An application for entry of the data was developed by VMI.
The database of WKHs is linked to the ordinary forestry database. This a valuable function in order to prevent cutting of WKH’s. The forestry database is also digitised for all enterprises carried out after 1995.
The data entry and digitising work have been completed without unexpected events. There are always some difficulties in interpreting the writing on field forms when the data entry is centralised and done by other staff. So to complete the data entry, some forms had to be reviewed to make them readable. The other way to organise the work, letting the surveyors themselves enter the data in computers, would have avoided some of these problems but would on the other hand have led to a large amount of data support and the organisation of data-collection to build the final database.
Inventory staff In our opinion, the surveyors have not had any problems in acquiring the additional knowledge that was needed to accomplish the work. Progress was quite fast and the quality of the inventory is already high. The surveyors’ basic knowledge of how different forests function has made it easier to adapt and use the additional knowledge. It must be noted, however, that the inventory staff used in the pilot inventory were particularly interested in biodiversity matters. The average forester will probably need more training to achieve the same results.
Our suggestion is that interested foresters from the Forest Enterprises, to some extent supported by foresters from VMI and staff from the protected areas, should be used for the full-scale inventory. It is ideal if the inventory staff, after the inventory is finished, remain in some of the forest services with their newly acquired knowledge and experience. The interest and knowledge of the inventory staff is, however, crucial to the result of the inventory. Experience from Sweden tells us that a genuine interest is needed if the methodology is to be learned and a good job done. 28
One argument against using Forest Enterprise staff, that has been presented to us, is that they may be economically bound to the forests and therefore have an interest in not finding WKHs, because designation as a WKH may in the future mean some kind of restriction on forestry. We think this problem can be solved by education. If an examination is to be made afterwards, this kind of behaviour will be detected. Another argument against using foresters, that has been put to us, is that most foresters lack an interest in biodiversity, which makes them unsuitable for learning the methodology, especially as regards the indicator species. We doubt that this statement is correct, but if this problem is real, using interested foresters only can easily solve it.
All inventory staff should work full-time on this job during the inventory season in order to become adequately skilled and efficient. The inventory season is all year round, except when the ground is covered with snow, or the days are too short. The beginning of March until the end of October is a suitable period most years.
Training The training was accomplished without major complications, the participants’ evaluation afterwards was generally positive, and in our opinion the participants made great progress.
There is a pedagogical conflict between the desire to teach assessment of the quality boundaries between WKH’s/PWKH’s and areas that are neither, and the desire to teach indicator species. It is most appropriate to teach indicator species in excellent WKHs, where there are many indicator species in a small area and in large populations. The excellent WKH’s are, however, a long way from the quality boundaries and give the wrong impression of what a typical WKH in a commercial forest looks like. It was difficult to find both types of stands near each other.
Our suggestion for initial training for the full-scale inventory is to concentrate, even more than we did, on stands that are difficult to assess, and less on teaching indicator species in WKH’s with extremely high biodiversity. Later, when the inventory staff begin to find their feet, single, special training days could be dedicated to teaching species.
Most of the experienced fieldworkers would have preferred more time for learning species, particularly in the field, and more detailed explanations of the regional differences. In general, most of them were satisfied with the quality and organisation of the courses.
Calibration The calibration showed that inventory staff and project managers generally agreed in their assessments. The areas that were visited were mostly on the quality boundaries between either a WKH or a PWKH, or a PWKH and another type of area, and therefore difficult to assess. The project managers and inventory staff coincided in their assessments. In only a few cases did slight corrections of the assessment level need to be made. Some clarifications were also made regarding how to classify particular sites types.
The fieldworkers suggest and the project managers support the idea that calibrations be held regularly throughout the full-scale inventory. 29
Examination The results of the examination are given and discussed under the heading ”Accuracy of the pilot study” in part 5.
The examination method seems to work rather well. If a statistically significant result is desired more work must be dedicated to the examination. Examination is also suggested during and after the full-scale inventory in order to evaluate the accuracy of the inventory and to improve it, or suggest additional inventories. The examination can also be a help in estimating the total amount of (P)WKHs in Lithuanian forests. This is an important figure when preparing national standards for certification and for planning a network of protected forests. 30 PART 4 Changes in the methodology after the pilot inventory
Changes in definitions Changes in definitions of Woodland Key Habitat types C.1. “Black alder wetland forest” has been renamed as “Black alder and birch wetland forest”. This makes it easier to assign stands with stagnant water dominated by birch to this type. Birch stands on deep peat layers with acidophilous vegetation will still be classified as type C.3. “Pine and birch wetland forest”.
D.2. “Slope towards lake” has been extended to “Slope towards lake and wetland”. This extension includes stands sloping towards open wetlands.
To make a clear distinction between the types D.1. and D.3. the first is renamed as: D.1. “Slope towards river” while D.3. keeps the name “Stream bank”. Slopes towards a river (watercourse wider than 5 m) belongs to D.1. and slopes towards a stream (watercourse less than 5 m) belongs to D.3.
K. “Giant trees” type was additionally split into K.1. “Single giant tree” and K.2. “Group of giant trees”. The recent WKH type was identified only in Lithuanian forests. The habitats consists of giant trees or biologically old trees distributed in wooded landscape sparsely or in groups, surrounded by younger trees, often of different species. Management history of the stands is complicated, the older trees for different reasons survived cuttings in surrounding woodland. Main tree species in these WKH are oak, ash, and pine.
The type M. is renamed as “Forest island in arable land” to underline that only forested areas are considered.
New Landscape Elements Small (up to 0.5 ha), shallow standing water body, which remains in dry seasons should be marked as “Non-intermittent pond”. This type does not include water bodies formed by beaver activity. Such waterbodies should be assigned to the key element “signs of beaver activity”.
Fragments of open grasslands, bogs, fens and swamps distributed in the wooded landscape are related to specific microclimatic and ecotone conditions. Similarly forest edges, the transition zone between two very different biotopes creates niches for species dependant on both biotopes. Therefore the landscape types “Open bog”, “Open swamp” and “Open grassland” are added.
Changes in the lists of indicator species/habitat specialists The current version of methodology includes the list of specialised and indicator mollusc species.
Three fungi (Postia floriformis, Postia leucomella, Tyromyces fissilis) have been deleted from the list of habitat specialists. Lactarius lignyotus has been moved to the group of habitat specialists. The vascular plants Epipactis atrorubens, Galium odoratum and Sanicula europaea have been deleted from the list of indicator species since they are considered to have too low an indicator value. Additionally, abbreviations of several species have been modified. 31
No new species have been added as a result of the pilot inventory.
Use of more difficult and small-sized indicator species and habitat specialists Although this inventory is not a species inventory, species are an important tool in assessing biological values. Many of the species used in the inventory are easy to identify after some training. The surveyor hardly ever misidentifies them. Some others need more training or should regularly be confirmed by a specialist or by microscopic examination. Interest in finding species very often leads to too optimistic identifications by the surveyors. To improve the quality of data in this sense the surveyors have to demonstrate their knowledge of the species by sending a specimen to experts. For really difficult species, findings should always be proved by sending a specimen to experts.
Changes in the Glossary of Terms Glossary of terms has been supplemented with definitions of several ecological terms and key landscape elements.
Changes in the preparatory work Coloured aerial photos, black and white aerial photos, ortophoto maps Different types of aerial photos were used only to a small extent during the pilot inventory. This was mainly due to lack of time for the preparatory work. The fieldworkers were trained to use aerial photos. The control inventory shows that time must be devoted to such work to obtain a good inventory result. Some stand types will otherwise be constantly underrepresented in the inventory. Copies of ortophoto maps must always be used in the fieldwork.
The search criteria in the forestry database Minor changes in the search criteria in the forestry database have been decided as a result of the pilot inventory. Quercus with more than 10 % of the stand mixture has been raised to 110 years age. For stands with less oak the age has been lowered to 130 years. Birch-dominated stands have to be 90 years old to be pre-selected. For broad-leaved trees like Ulmus, Tilia and Acer as well as for aspen (Populus tremula) the stand age has to be 70 years to be pre-selected. For stands dominated by Alnus incana the stand age has been lifted to 60 year to be pre-selected. All stands with spruce older than 100 years are also pre-selected. Salix caprea has to be of 60 years age to make a stand pre-selected. These changes will make the field work more efficient by reducing the number of visits to stands without WKH qualities. 32
Changes in the field work and compilation work
All pre-selected stands should be marked on the copy of the work map. This increases the efficiency of work. All checked and rejected stands must be indicated in the “List of Rejected Stands”.
The inventory fieldsheet has been changed to make more convenient entry of data into the database (see Appendix 1).
The boundaries of found WKS’s and PWKH’s are marked with continuous white lines on the ortophoto maps (5×5 km; M 1:10 000). Buffer zones should be included in WKH. The size of buffer zone is set according to site conditions and potential damaging factors.
Code of found WKH include six digits, of which the first four are the number of ortophoto map and the last two are the sequence number of WKH. Each ortophoto map starts new WKH sequence.
Small adjacent WKHs of different but similar types should be described as one. Different WKHs can be merged if they can be classified within the same major WKH type (A, B or C). If WKHs represent different major types (e.g. A and B or B and C), they should be described separately. 33 PART 5 Inventory results, estimated costs and additional conclusions
The amount of Woodland Key Habitats The pilot inventory area covers a total of 279,700 ha of forests distributed throughout 15 Enterprises, National and Regional Parks. In seven of these, comprising 184,200 ha of forests, the inventory has been completed. In another 8 areas the inventory has covered a forest area estimated to 95,500 ha. Totally more than 226,000 ha of forests have been surveyed during the pilot inventory corresponding to roughly 11 % of the Lithuanian forest. The proportion of Woodland Key Habitat and Potential Woodland Key Habitat area found in the inventory where the inventory is completed is 2.7 %.
It must be underlined that strictly protected forests (group 1) have not been surveyed during the pilot inventory. On a national scale these forests represent 1.6 % of the total forest area. Since all activities are prohibited in these forests they are not in immediate danger. It is probable that a very high proportion of these forests will have WKH qualities. To build a base of knowledge about biological values in forests these forests should also be covered by the inventory. For the next step, when planning a network of protected forests, it is necessary to also know more about the strictly protected forests.
The total area of Woodland Key Habitats and Potential Woodland Key Habitats found in all surveyed Enterprises and protected areas are 6,346 ha. Of this area 3,930 ha (62%) and 929 sites are WKH and 2,416 ha (38%) and 892 sites are PWKH.
As demonstrated in Table 1 the proportions of Woodland Key Habitat and Potential Woodland Key Habitat area found in the different counties vary from 1.7% to 4.3%. The highest figure is from Žemaitija NP.
Table 1. Inventoried area and registered number of Woodland Key Habitats and Potential Woodland Key Habitats in completed areas.
Enterprise / Total Number of Total area of (P)WKH % of average Protected inventoried registered P(WKH) forest land (P)WKH area forest area (P)WKH (ha) area (ha) (ha) Biržai 56,291.2 394 1820.59 3.23 4.62 Panėvežys 74,319.9 391 1896.27 2.55 4.85 Dubrava 16,628.6 183 285.69 1.72 1.56 Aukštaitija NP 25,361.5 187 470.76 1.86 2.52 Žemaitija NP 11,571.8 307 501.90 4.34 1.63
Total 184,173 1,462 4,975.21 2.70 3.40
The control WKH inventory indicates that in average about 60 % of the WKH and PWKH area have been found in the pilot inventory. Our estimation is that approximately 1.4-3.9 % of private forests is WKH or PWKH as well as 2.3-3.8 % - in reserved for restitution forests and 2.6-5.0 % - in the state forests. We estimate that around 80 % of this occurrence will be found in a full-scale inventory using the methodology with suggested improvements. 34
The size of Woodland Key Habitats The average size of a WKH and PWKH was 3.5 ha. This varies between the inventoried counties from 1.56 ha (Dubrava forest enterprise) to 7.19 (Veisiejai forest enterprise) and 7.23 (Prienai forest enterprise). The last figures represent however only a limited number of (P)WKHs. The WKHs are in general somewhat larger (average 4.23 ha) than the PWKH’s (average 2.71 ha). The largest registered area is a PWKH of Pine and Birch Wetland forest (C3) in Panėvežys with a size of 126.45 ha. Only 28 WKH’s or PWKH’s are larger than 20 ha, most of them are Pine and Birch Wetland forests. One Recently Abandoned Wooded Grassland from Aukštaitijos exceeds 20 ha. The smallest Woodland Key Habitats are Giant trees (K).
The types of Woodland Key Habitats The most common Woodland Key Habitat type found in the pilot inventory is Spruce and mixed spruce forest (A.1) (see Appendix 1). Broad-leaved wetland forest (C.4) is a very rare type and has only been found 14 times in the pilot inventory. From more detailed statistics a clear pattern emerges that Pine and mixed pine forests (A.2) are rare in Biržai and Panėvežys but more common in Aukštaitijos and Dzukijos. Spruce and mixed spruce forests are common in Žemaitijos and Biržai. Broad-leaved forest types are most common in Biržai, Panėvežys and Nemunas Kilpos RP. Since the pilot inventory was carried out in different parts of the country the result probably gives a reliable picture of the proportions of these types of WKHs in Lithuania.
Table 2: Distribution of WKH types not related to Landscape Elements. The table includes both WKHs and (P)WKHs
WKH type Number of Area of the (P)WKH’s (P)WKH´s A.1. SPRUCE AND MIXED SPRUCE FORESTS 285 835.61 A.2. PINE AND MIXED PINE FORESTS 176 520.86 B.1. BROAD-LEAVED FOREST 239 1065.51 B.2. OTHER DECIDUOUS FOREST 258 760.02 C.1. BLACK ALDER WETLAND FOREST 218 675.31 C.2. SPRUCE AND MIXED SPRUCE WETLAND FOREST 191 597.44 C.3. PINE OR BIRCH WETLAND FOREST 179 1190.61 C.4. BROAD-LEAVED WETLAND FOREST 14 21.98
Woodland Key Habitat types connected with Landscape Elements are much rarer. These types are more difficult to find through searching the forestry database. A more organised use of coloured aerial photos will probably give better search methods for these WKH types. Their proportion will thereby probably increase. The most common type is Stream bank (D.3) followed by Ravine (H.2). Shore of a temporary water-body (F.1) has not been registered at all in the pilot inventory. 35
Table 3: Distribution of WKH types related to Landscape Elements.
Type of WKH Number of Area of the (P)WKH (P)WKH´s D.1. SLOPE OF WATERCOURSE 11 47.53 D.2. SLOPE OF LAKE 19 74.98 D.3. STREAM BANK 32 72.05 E.1. LOW BANK AND FLOODPLAIN OF RIVER OR 3 51.48 LAKE E.2. FLOODPLAIN OF STREAM 3 7.59 E.3. SHORE OF LAKE 1 1.89 F.1. SHORE OF A TEMPORARY WATER-BODY 0 0 F.2. SPRING-INFLUENCED AREA 5 11.76 F.3. SURROUNDING OF CALCAREOUS FEN OR 11.06 MOIST MEADOW F.4. AREA INFLUENCED BY BEAVER DAM 5 35.09 G. SMALL ISLANDS OR PENINSULAS IN WATER 85.77 OR WETLAND H.1. SLOPE 13 45.59 H.2. RAVINE 23 110.33
WKH types related to disturbance and stand history are with one exception even rarer. Only Giant trees (K) reach high numbers. Fire-scarred forest (I) and Still managed wooded meadow (J.3) have not been recorded at all during the pilot inventory.
Table 3: Distribution of WKH types related to disturbance and forest history.
WKH type Number of Area of the (P)WKH’s (P)WKH´s I. FIRE-SCARRED FOREST 0 0 J.1. OVERGROWN WOODED GRASSLAND (PREVIOUS 9 14.93 MEADOW/ PASTURE) J.2. RECENTLY OVERGROWN WOODED GRASSLAND 7 33.6 J.3. STILL MANAGED WOODED MEADOW 0 0 J.4. STILL MANAGED WOODED PASTURE 3 8.19 K. GIANT TREE 98 110.82 L. OLD PARK 11 28.4 M. ISLAND IN ARABLE LAND 9 9.47
The use of landscape elements and biological elements Biological elements are important tools to assess the sites in the field. All registered sites have marks on one or more biological elements. Fallen trees with bark (2,630 registrations) and Natural snags (2,622 registrations) are the most noted biological elements. Standing biologically old, normal sized trees are also commonly noted. Also Standing, old, normal-sized dead trees are frequent in the database. Spruce is the most common tree among living old trees and pine among standing dead trees. Among more rare biological elements can be mentioned Signs of fire (26 registrations) and Eagle or black stork nests (61 registrations). 36
Landscape elements are also used as indicators of biological values. Edges dominate the list, with Forest edge with other forest as a clear winner with 1,082 registrations. Forest edges towards meadows and pastures are remarkably common with more than 170 registrations each. Springy areas account for 130 registrations.
Indicator species and habitat specialists Although this inventory is not a species inventory, the use of species is an integral part of the methodology. The most common species found during the pilot inventory are presented in table 4.
Table 4: The 14 most noted Indicator species and Habitat specialists.
Found indicator species (I)/habitat Number of registrations specialists (H) Neckera pennata (H) 296 Huperzia selago (I) 247 Ulota crispa (I) 234 Neckera complanata (I) 230 Phellinus pini (I) 190 Boletus spp. (I) 177 Bazzania trilobata (H) 132 Arthonia leucopellaea (H) 102 Galium odoratum (I) 100 Nowellia curvifolia (I) 95 Frullania dilatata (I) 91 Chrysothrix spp. (I) 81 Lecanactis abietina (H) 81 Clavicorona pyxidata (I) 80
The high presence of Neckera pennata is noteworthy. Among interesting findings can be mentioned that the lichen Lecanactis abietina was not known in Lithuania before this inventory started. Now more than 80 localities are registered, practically all in Biržai enterprise. Thelotrema lepadinum, another but somewhat more conspicuous crustaceous lichen, was found 43 times, principally in Biržai enterprise. This lichen was not registered either in Lithuania before the start of this inventory.
Accuracy of the pilot study The control inventory was carried out by: • Darius Norkūnas, the Lithuanian Nature Fund (LNF) • Darius Stončius, LNF • Rimgaudas Treinys, LNF • Silvija Šaudytė, the Lithuanian Forest Institute
The examination was carried out in October – November, 2001. Locations were chosen in Biržai, Panevėžys and Dubrava forest enterprises and Dzūkija NP. 37
The control area was 3,393.8 ha of forest land. 31 blocks (forest compartments), approx. 100 ha each, were chosen. 93% of the blocks were chosen where the inventory has been completed (sites selected from forestry database). 7% of the blocks were “empty” - where no stands were pre-selected from the forestry database (chosen randomly in other forest areas).
During the control inventory 56 WKH and 25 PWKH including 3 WKH and 4 PWKH in “empty” blocks were found.
Using the forestry database the WKH inventory fieldworkers found about 60 - 70% of all WKHs. However, 23.1% of WKHs were found by fieldworkers during the control inventory (overlapped or particularly overlapped), 54.8 % - were found only by the control inventory and 22.1 % – were found only during the inventory (60% - PWKHs).
In Dzūkija NP about 92 % of all WKHs in selected blocks have been found only by the control inventory.
During the WKH inventory the fieldworkers found 10-50 % of WKH’s that haven’t been found during the control. The difference could be determined by insufficient or inaccurate use of different criteria, e.g. species.
The examiners conclusions are that a greater proportion of WKH types connected with Landscape Elements than general types were not discovered with this methodology. However WKH’s connected with Landscape Elements are easier to identify on aerial photos.
We consider these indicative results to be rather good, taking into account that the inventory staff are beginners. It takes some time to learn the many different WKH types as well as their differences and complexity. Another implication is that the fieldworkers should use more sources of information and be better experienced in using species indicators?.
The working pace The average working pace of this pilot inventory has been 248 ha/day for the fieldwork in enterprises (inclusive 2 Regional Parks) and National Parks where the work has been completed. The fully inventoried forest area is 184,173 ha. The figures show great variation from 155 ha/day to over 350 ha/day. The highest figure is from Aukštaitija NP. A possible explanation for this is that strictly protected areas have been excluded from this pilot inventory. In enterprises and regional parks strictly protected forests cover lower parts of the forests. In national parks, large areas being strictly protected, have not been surveyed. On average it was possible to check about 8 pre-selected WKH/day.
When co-ordinating work at VMI, preparatory work, transport and compilation are added the working pace per day and estimated to 150 ha / day. Staff training is also included in these figures. 38
The pilot areas were located to enterprises where preparation for certification is planned. The pilot inventory comprised also three national parks as well as a number of regional parks spread over the country. The area covered during 2001 is therefore representative for Lithuania in general and the estimations of costs are realistic.
We estimate that the working pace in a full-scale inventory also will be around 150 ha/day. This sum also includes time for training, preparatory work and compilation work. We foresee some increase in the volume of the preparatory work and some increase of the efficiency of the fieldwork.
Costs for a full-scale inventory A full-scale inventory of Lithuania accomplished in three years would entail the following costs (more detailed calculations can be received from the project managers):
45 persons are needed as field inventory staff for 8 months a year (vacation not included).
1 project leader is needed for 12 months a year.
4 experts are needed for a total of 3x1 months of training each year.
Expatriate experts are needed for training, calibration and consultancy, for a total of 8 months during the first year and 6 months during the second year.
Total cost of salaries: 11,315,000 SEK Cost of transport: 1,243,000 SEK Costs for travel and accommodation during courses: 184,000 SEK Cost of maps: 210,000 SEK Costs of database hosting, data entry and digitising 90,000 SEK Office costs: 135,000 SEK Cost of equipment for surveyors: 70,000 SEK Cost of printing of brochures and final report: 170,000 SEK
Ca for incidental costs: 70,000 SEK
The total sum needed to carry out a Woodland Key Habitat inventory on a national level in 3 years is 13,487,000 SEK.
A decrease in Woodland Key Habitats Because of the nature of most WKHs they generally evolve very slowly; in particular some biodiversity qualities, like long log continuity, do not evolve at all for all practical purposes in the time scale of man and forestry.
A rather rapid decrease in WKH’s may be occurring in Lithuania at the moment. Facts that indicates this are:
1. A significant part of WKH’s that were found on state forestland in the pilot areas belong to the areas planned to be clear-felled. This figure may become even higher since additional areas may be planned later. 2. There is a very high level of sanitary cutting (1,394,800 m3 for 2000). Sanitary cutting nearly always alters a WKH to a non-WKH. 39
3. A high level of economic activity in the forest without any knowledge of where the WKH’s are located.
The project has come across many stands that have been transformed from WKHs into non-WKHs because of sanitary cutting and intensive use of forest for fuel production by private owners. Former sanitary cutting was the reason why, in about half of the cases, an area located by the search system was not a WKH.
Rather a lot of very old stands located by the search system have recently been clear-felled.
Cutting activities in the stand or in adjacent stands accounts for 53 % of the negative disturbances in the registered WKH’s and PWKH’s during the pilot inventory.
Our suggestion for solving the problem of the unknown decrease in Woodland Key Habitats is that:
1. A full-scale inventory of Woodland Key Habitats in all forests regardless of ownership and protection group should be made in the coming three years.
2. Woodland Key Habitats that are found should be put into a conservation process according to law and certification demands.
3. Training of staff in the forest enterprises in the basics of Woodland Key Habitat qualities in forests so they exempt obvious stands from any type of cutting when this is planned.
We also suggest that a plan for building a lasting network of protected forests should be lanced. This should be done in co-ordination with international efforts like Natura2000, Pan-European Biological and landscape Diversity Strategy, Baltic Agenda 21 in Forestry, Baltic Forest Map and also take into account national interests, needs and peculiarities like the development of a protected area system and the creation of a Lithuanian Nature Frame. The obligations of the Lithuanian Biodiversity Protection Strategy and Action Plan, the Forest Act and the Protected Area Act should be fulfilled to preserve and maintain forest biodiversity. In such a plan the WKH database would be a useful base of building blocks of biologically valuable cores. Though such a plan is not included in the present project.
Additional effects of the project The pilot inventory has already created new knowledge and enthusiasm on biodiversity and conservation issues in the concerned forest organisations. A full- scale inventory involving other parts of the Lithuanian forest community would increase this effect even more.
Experts from the Lithuanian universities have been engaged in training and new relations between researchers and foresters as well as ecologists from the protected areas have evolved. 40
Final conclusions The project has reached quite considerable consensus concerning:
1. A definition of a Woodland Key Habitat, 2. An inventory methodology for Woodland Key Habitats, 3. The best management methods for the biodiversity values in the different types of Woodland Key Habitat.
A pilot inventory using the methodology developed has been carried out by trained foresters and ecologists, and examined with satisfactory results. The total area covered by the inventory largely exceeded the plans. Its accuracy was high and a rather high proportion of (P)WKH’s was found.
We have a good idea of:
1. Which Woodland Key Habitat types there are and in what quantities, 2. The accuracy of the methodology, 3. The current protection of, and threats to, the Woodland Key Habitats, 4. The costs of a full-scale inventory.
The Lithuanian Inventory of Woodland Key Habitats was performed in a legislative environment where the forest should be used “in the way which would decrease the negative environmental impact, make rational forestry on forest land, maintain soil fertility, protect biological biodiversity… “ (from Lithuanian Forest law). This makes the inventory very valuable from a conservation point of view.
The Woodland Key Habitat inventory is a necessary basis for the certification of forests according to FSC-criteria. The inventory also gives important data for decision-making concerning nature conservation issues in forest ecosystems.
We therefore think that the main objectives of the project were satisfactorily fulfilled.
Acknowledgements
Valuable suggestions and comments from many different persons have influenced the results of the project to a large extent. Many people have been helpful in organising the work, finding sites and supporting us in various ways. We are very grateful to:
Rasa Arlauskienė, UAB “Stora Enso Miškas”; Jonas Augustauskas, Division of Biological Diversity, Department of Nature Protection, MoE; Rolands Auzins, the State Forest Service, Latvia; Linas Balčiauskas, the Institute of Ecology, Vilnius; Arūnas Balsevičius, the Institute of Botany, Vilnius; Edmundas Bartkevičius, Forestry faculty, Lithuanian University of Agriculture, Kaunas; Rūta Baškytė, Service of Protected Areas; Laimutis Budrys, the Department of Nature Protection, MoE; Raimondas Čiuplys, the Laboratory of Flora and Geobotany, the Institute of Botany, Vilnius; 41
Leandras Deltuva, the Lithuanian Forest Inventory and Management Institute; Bengt Ehnström, the Swedish Threatened Species Unit, Sweden; Tommy Ek, the County Board of Östergötland, Sweden; Albertas Garbinčius, the Lithuanian Forest Inventory and Management Institute; Kastytis Gedminas, the Division of Protected Area Management and Protection, Protected Areas’ Service; Edmundas Greimas, the Lithuanian Ministry of Environment; Zigmantas Gudžinskas, the Laboratory of Flora and Geobotany, Institute of Botany, Vilnius; Josefine Gustavsson, the Regional Forestry Board of Östra Götaland, Sweden; Arūnas Gužauskas, Trakai national park; Tomas Hallingbäck, the Swedish Threatened Species Unit, Sweden; Nele Ingerpuu, Tartu Agriculture University, Estonia; Reda Iršėnaitė, the Laboratory of Mycology, Institute of Botany, Vilnius; Rita Jakučiūnienė, the Division of Protected Area Management and Protection, Protected Areas’ Service; Ilona Jukonienė, the Laboratory of Flora and Geobotany, Institute of Botany, Vilnius; Dalia Juočerytė, PE “Means of Energy’s Saving”; Andrius Juodis, the Lithuanian Forest Inventory and Management Institute; Dainius Jurėnas, Kaltanėnai the Forest District, Aukštaitinjos national park; Stasys Kasperavičius, Kazitiškis Forest district, Ignalina Forest Enterprise; Karina Kitnæs, Århus, Denmark; Dalia Križinauskienė, Nemunas Kilpos Regional Park; Janina Kriugiškytė, Minčiagiris Forest district, Aukštaitijos national park; Rimantas Krupickas, Vilnius Pedagogical University; Andrius Kuliešis, the Lithuanian Forest Inventory and Management Institute, Kaunas; Mart Külvik, the Environmental Protection Institute, Tartu, Estonia; Petras Kurlavičius, the Lithuanian Ornithological Society; Ernestas Kutorga, Vilnius university; Riina Martverk, the Forest Department of Estonian Ministry of Environment, Estonia; Pranas Mierauskas, the Lithuanian Nature Fund; Audrius Mikalauskas, UAB “Stora Enso Miškas”; Stasys Mizaras, the Lithuanian Forest Research Institute, Kaunas; Jurga Motiejūnaitė, the Laboratory of Mycology, Institute of Botany, Vilnius; Antanas Morkevičius, Association "Lietuvos mediena" (Lithuanian wood); Sigita Mozgeris, the Division of Forest Inventory, Management and Resources, Forest Department, MoE; Mikael Norén, the National Board of Forestry, Sweden; Rimantas Ozolinčius, Lithuanian Forest Research Institute; Romas Pakalnis, the Institute of Botany; Anneli Palo, the Environmental Protection Institute, Tartu, Estonia; Erast Parmasto, Tartu Agriculture University, Estonia; Daiva Patalauskaitė, the Laboratory of Flora and Geobotany, Institute of Botany, Vilnius; Gintaras Pivoras, Aukštaitija NP Ecological Monitoring Station; Žydrūnas Preikša, Meteliai RP; Gediminas Raščius, the Lithuanian Department of Protected Areas; 42
Valerijus Rašomavičius, the Laboratory of Flora and Geobotany, Institute of Botany, Vilnius; Rauno Reinberg, the Forest Department of the Estonian Ministry of Environment, Estonia; Edvardas Riepšas, the Department of Silviculture, Lithuanian University of Agriculture, Kaunas; Algirdas Rutkauskas, the Lithuanian Forest Inventory and Management Institute, Kaunas; Žydrūnas Sinkevičius, Meteliai RP; Saulis Skuja, the Lithuanian Forest Inventory and Management Institute, Kaunas; Grita Skujienė, Vilnius University; Darius Stončius, the Lithuanian Nature Fund ; Kristina Svirbutavičiūtė, the Lithuanian Forest Inventory and Management Institute, Kaunas; Rimantas Survila, the State Land Survey Institute; Bronius Šablevičius, Aukštaitijos national park; Kęstutis Šakūnas, Dubrava experimental – training Forest Enterprise; Silvija Šaudytė, the Lithuanian Forest Research Institute, Kaunas; Mykolas. Šimkūnas, Minčiagiris Forest district, Aukštaitija National Park; Vaidotas Šliogeris, Pagramantis Regional Park; Peter Sørensen, NEPCon, Denmark; Vytautas Tamutis, the Lithuanian Agricultural University, Kaunas; Albinas Tebėra, the Forest Faculty, the Lithuanian Agricultural University, Kaunas; Vincentas Urbonas, the Laboratory of Mycology, Institute of Botany, Vilnius; Rūta Vaičiūnaitė, the Lithuanian Nature Fund ; Valdas Vaičiūnas, the Forest Department, MoE; Eduardas Vaitkevičius, the Division of Protected Area Management and Protection, Protected Areas’ Service; Gintaras Venckus, the Division of Forest Inventory, Management and Resources, Forest Department, MoE; Juozas Virbickas, the Institute of Ecology, Vilnius; Mečislovas Žalakevičius, the Institute of Ecology, Vilnius; Paulius Zolubas, the Lithuanian Forest Research Institute, Kaunas; Tadas Zubavičius, Birštonas Forest district, Prienai Forest Enterprise.
We would also specially thank all members of the Steering Committee and Advisory Board, Bo Thor, the Regional Forestry Board of Östra Götaland, Sweden, and Donatas Dudutis, the Department of Forests, Lithuania, who gave almost daily support in all possible ways to the project. And we would also like to address a thank you to all the surveyors. They provided valuable help in improving the methodology and organising various events during the project time.
References See appendix 1, page 61. 43 Appendix 1 – Inventory of Woodland Key Habitats. Methodology. Forest Department, Ministry of Environment, Lithuania County Forestry Board, Östra Götaland, Sweden INVENTORY OF WOODLAND KEY HABITATS
METHODOLOGY
Leif Andersson, Rimvydas Kriukelis, Raimondas Čiuplys
VILNIUS – LINKÖPING, 2002
- 1 - Preface to the 2nd edition What’s new in this version of methodology?
Results of the pilot WKH inventory 2001 and the experience gained during the fieldwork led to this modified version of the methodology of WKH inventory. Misspellings and errors spotted in the previous version were corrected and some minor changes were added. The proposals from the fieldworkers and experts were discussed and registered in the Seminar on Pilot WKH Inventory: Experience from the Fieldwork in 2001, Vilnius, December 12th, 2001, and the meetings of Methodology Group in December 2001 - February 2002. The review of Methodology from geographical point of view was done in February 2002. Some new experts were participating in the discussions (see Preface).
Changes in WKH classification
C.1. “Black alder wetland forest” has been renamed to “Black alder and birch wetland forest”. This makes it easier to assign stands with stagnant water dominated by birch to this type. Birch stands on deep peat layers with acidophilous vegetation will still be classified as type C.3. “Pine and birch wetland forest”.
D.2. “Slope towards lake” has been extended to “Slope towards lake and wetland”. This extension includes stands sloping towards open wetlands.
To make a clear distinction between the types D.1. and D.3. the first is renamed as: D.1. “Slope towards river” while D.3. keeps the name “Stream bank”. Slopes towards a river (watercourse wider than 5 m) belongs to D.1. and slopes towards a stream (watercourse less than 5 m) belongs to D.3.
K. “Giant trees” type was additionally split into K.1. “Single giant tree” and K.2. “Group of giant trees”. The recent WKH type was identified only in Lithuanian forests. The habitat consists of giant trees or biologically old trees distributed in wooded landscape sparsely or in groups, surrounded by younger trees, often of different species. Management history of the stands is complicated; the older trees for different reasons survived cuttings in surrounding woodland. Main tree species in these WKH are oak, ash, and pine.
The type M. is renamed to “Forest island in arable land” to underline that only forested areas are considered.
Changes in the lists of indicator species/ habitat specialists
The current version of methodology includes the list of specialised and indicator mollusc species.
Three fungi (Postia floriformis, Postia leucomella, Tyromyces fissilis) have been deleted from the list of habitat specialists. Lactarius lignyotus has been moved to the group of habitat specialists. The vascular plants Epipactis atrorubens, Galium odoratum and Sanicula europaea have been deleted from the list of indicator species since they have been considered to have too low indicator value. Additionally, abbreviations of several species have been modified.
- 2 - Changes in the Glossary of Terms
Glossary of terms has been supplemented with definitions of several ecological terms and key landscape elements.
Changes in the Work Instructions
All pre-selected stands should be marked on the copy of the work map. This increases the efficiency of work. All checked and rejected stands must be indicated in the “List of Rejected Stands”.
The inventory fieldsheet has been changed to make more convenient entry of data into the database (see Appendix 1).
The boundaries of found WKS’s and PWKH’s are marked with continuous white lines on the ortophoto maps (5×5 km; M 1:10 000). Buffer zones should be included in WKH. The size of buffer zone is set according to site conditions and potential damaging factors.
Code of found WKH includes six digits, of which the first four are the number of ortophoto map and the last two are the sequence number of WKH. Each ortophoto map starts new WKH sequence.
Small adjacent WKHs of different but similar types should be described as one. Different WKHs can be merged if they can be classified within the same major WKH type (A, B or C). If WKHs represent different major types (e.g. A and B or B and C), they should be described separately.
New Key Landscape Elements
Small (up to 0.5 ha), shallow standing water body, which remains in dry season should be marked as “Non-intermittent pond”. This type does not include water bodies formed by beaver activity. Such waterbodies should be assigned to the key element “signs of beaver activity”.
Fragments of open grasslands, bogs, fens and swamps distributed in the wooded landscape are related with specific microclimatic and ecotone conditions. Similarly to forest edges, transition zone between two very different biotopes creates nisches for species dependant from both biotopes. Therefore the landscape types “Open bog”, “Open swamp” and “Open grassland” are added.
New Biological Key Elements
Large nest is marked if the nest of black stork, eagle or other raptor species is found. Differently from the previous version, the nest does not make the site a WKH automatically. This element is of equivalent to the rest Key elements. The detailed information about found nests should be filled in the separate table in the fieldsheet.
Abundance of fungi or lichens dependant from suitable substrates is labelled according to the presence of substrate in the WKH area: single corresponds one substrate unit (tree, snag, stool
- 3 - etc.), moderately abundant – 2–4 substrate units; very abundant – 5 and more substrate units. Substrate type should be indicated in Remarks.
Modified “Negative disturbances”
Working/not working drainage system should not be indicated if elimination of this disturbance would change favourable microclimate conditions.
Recent management is recorded if management activities (logging, clearing, moving away of dead wood) are indicated at the moment of inventory or signs of recent management are spotted (e.g. tree stumps not yet covered with mosses).
The important characteristics of WKH not yet indicated in the other fields of the fieldsheet should be recorded in the Point 9 (Remarks). This field is now organised in more structured way.
The search criteria in the forestry database
Minor changes in the search criteria in the forestry database have been decided as a result of the pilot inventory. Quercus with more than 10 % of the stand mixture has been raised to 110 years age. For stands with less oak in the stand the age has been lowered to 130 years. Birch-dominated stands have to be 90 years old to be pre-selected. For broad-leaved trees like Ulmus, Tilia and Acer as well as for aspen (Populus tremula) the stand age has to be 70 years to be pre-selected. For stands dominated by Alnus incana the stand age has been lifted to 60 year to be pre-selected. All stands with spruce older than 100 years are also pre- selected. Salix caprea has to be of 60 years age to make a stand pre-selected. These changes will make the fieldwork more efficient reducing the number of visits to stands without WKH qualities.
Vilnius - Linköping, 20th February 2002
Leif Anderson, Operative project leader, Pro Natura, Sweden Rimvydas Kriukelis, Local project leader Raimondas Čiuplys, Co-ordinator of Methodology Group, Institute of Botany
- 4 - Preface
The project Woodland Key Habitat Inventory in Lithuania is a joint Lithuanian-Swedish project. The main objective for the project is to develop classification, methodology and carry out a Woodland Key Habitat inventory.
The draft inventory methodology was developed in spring 2001 in co-operation between Lithuanian and Swedish experts. It was be used and tested in the pilot inventory in the field season 2001 and will be used during the full-scale WKH inventory in Lithuania 2002-2004. .
This document has been produced by a Methodology group consisting of:
Rimvydas Kriukelis, Local project leader Leif Andersson, Operative project leader, Pro Natura (Sweden) Paulius Zolubas, Lithuanian Forest Research Institute (until May 2001) Silvija Šaudytė, Lithuanian Forest Research Institute Leandras Deltuva, Forest Inventory and Management Institute Saulis Skuja, Forest Inventory and Management Institute Jurga Motiejūnaitė, Institute of Botany Raimondas Čiuplys, Institute of Botany Darius Stončius, Lithuanian Fund for Nature (from December 2001)
Following experts developed the lists of indicator species and habitat specialists and contributed to the methodology work:
Raimondas Čiuplys, vascular plants Reda Iršenaite, fungi Ilona Jukonienė, bryophytes Ernestas Kutorga, fungi Jurga Motiejūnaitė, lichens Daiva Patalauskaite, vascular plants Bronius Šablevičius, beetles Vytautas Tamutis, beetles Vincentas Urbonas, fungi
The methodology is largely based on experiences gained in similar Wooland Key Habitat inventories in Latvia and Estonia.
Valuable suggestions and comments from different persons have greatly influenced the methodology. We are very grateful to:
Andrius Kuliešis, State Institute of Forest Inventory and Management Ernestas Kutorga, Vilnius University Vincentas Urbonas, Institute of Botany Valerijus Rašomavičius, Institute of Botany Rimantas Krupickas, Vilnius Pedagogical University E. Kupčinskienė, Lithuanian Agricultural University
- 5 - Riina Martverk, Forest Department, Environmental Ministry, Estonia Rauno Reinberg, Forest Department, Environmental Ministry, Estonia Tommy Ek, County Board, Östergötland, Sweden Rolands Auzins, State Forest Service, Latvia Bengt Ehnström, Swedish Threatened Species Unit Nele Ingerpuu, Tartu Agriculture University, Estonia Erast Parmasto, Tartu Agriculture University, Estonia Valdemaras Simėnas, Vilnius University
This is a bilateral project of the Forest Department under the Ministry of Environment (former Department of Forests and Protected Areas under the Ministry of Environment), Lithuania, and the Regional Forestry Board of Östra Götaland, Sweden. The expenses within the project are financed by the Lithuanian Ministry of Environment and the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency.
Reflections and suggestions on the methodology are warmly welcome and should be sent to:
Rimvydas Kriukelis Pilot Woodland Key Habitat Inventory in Lithuania Project A. Juozapaviciaus g. 9 LT-2600 Vilnius Lithuania Phone/Fax: +370-2-709 304 Mobile: +370-87-77268 E-mail: [email protected]
Vilnius, February 2002
- 6 - Content
page
Preface 2 1. Background 8 2. Essence of Woodland Key Habitat and its protection 10 3. Work instruction 12 3.1. Preparatory work 12 3.2. Fieldwork 14 3.3. Compilation work 32 4. Woodland Key Habitat classification 33 4.1. General Woodland Key Habitats types 33 4.2. Woodland Key Habitats in connection to Landscape Elements 43 4.3. Woodland Key Habitats related to disturbance and forest history 51 5. Terminology 57 6. Literature used 64
ANNEX 1 Fieldsheet 73 ANNEX 2 Indicator species and habitat specialists 76 ANNEX 3 Classification of forest types 87 ANNEX 4 Search criteria for WKH´s in the Forestry database 88
- 7 - 1. Background
Forestry and forest products are of great socio-economic importance to Lithuania. During recent years value added in forest sector was increasingly steadily, annually contributing 2,6- 3% of gross domestic product in Lithuania.
The Lithuanian Forest Authorities recognise that, as formulated by the Helsinki process, the Pan-European Landscape and Biodiversity Strategy, Natura 2000 network, EU Habitat directive, an Agenda 21 for the Baltic Sea Region and other international legal acts, maintenance and enhancement of biological diversity is a key element sustainable forest management in Lithuania. Sharing of the information and experiences is one of the most important options for actions in order to identify key habitats of significant environmental value and to conserve them and/or apply special management practices there, and to take them into account in the land use planning.
Eco-labelling (certifying) systems for forest products are being developed on both national and international levels. The main purpose of eco-labelling is to preserve the biodiversity. An inventory of existing biodiversity values would help meet market demand for green forest products.
Many forest species in northern and central Europe, and Lithuania, are more or less threatened due to a lack of the following features: 1. Old and dying trees of different species, 2. Coarse woody debris (dead standing or lying trees, snags etc.) of different size, age, exposition, and tree species, 3. Long continuity of a certain type, for example spruce wetland forests with long continuity of tree cover and high humidity.
Protected areas occupy 11,5% of the whole territory in Lithuania. Forests occupy 62 % of national park and 48% of the regional park total area. In around 28,6 % of the Lithuanian forest (forest groups I-III) there is some kind of restricted management or protection. In many of these areas, selective and sanitary cutting are allowed, and the old and dying trees and coarse woody debris are removed.
Due to forest history and other reasons, very high biodiversity values are to be found at fragmented, in most cases with limited area, so-called ”hot spots” in the forest. In these areas, or habitats, the biodiversity is extraordinarily high. These Woodland Key Habitats (WKH), as they are known, constitute only a small percentage of the forest area, but contain a high proportion of the biodiversity present in a landscape, when it comes to rare or threatened species. Knowing their location is helpful in maintaining a large amount of biodiversity in a cost-effective way.
Preservation of the biodiversity in the Woodland Key Habitats should not be seen as the final and the only measure needed to preserve threatened biodiversity in the forest landscape.
First of all the amount of WKH of different types might not be large enough to sustain the biodiversity that depends on different types of high quality habitats.
- 8 - Many specialised species also depend on other features than continuous habitats; some need a more scattered forest quality, not connected to continuous areas or habitats. Many of these species are probably best preserved by an adaptation of ordinary forestry. For example, threatened beetles, dependent on sun-exposed, biologically old pines and CWD, are probably best preserved by retaining old pines and CWD on ordinary clear-cuts. Many birds fall into this category and are only partly preserved by an extensive net of WKH's.
It should also be stressed that WKH's are areas containing threatened biodiversity. Areas with a special value for the cultural heritage or for the variety of species richness along ecological gradients (beta diversity) are only to a minor extent covered by the WKH concept used in the current project.
The Woodland Key Habitats are like islands in a matrix of what for many habitat specialists is unsuitable forest. In order to preserve these species in sustainable populations in the future, it may be necessary to construct a network of smaller and larger complementary areas and dispersal pathways, or stepping-stones, between the Woodland Key Habitats.
The result of the Woodland Key Habitat inventory is meant to provide a source of information for use in devising policies and making decisions about management of the forest.
Among estimated use of the result the Woodland Key Habitat Inventory the following points should be mentioned: ♦ General planning of the protection of biologically valuable woodland. A base for establishing a network of protected forests. ♦ A base for revision of zoning and elaborating of management plans for national parks, regional parks, state reserves, and other protected areas. ♦ The mapping of Woodland Key Habitats is necessary for certification of forests aiming to sustainable forestry. ♦ The result gives a base for calculating the need of protection and eventually restoration of woodlands in order to preserve biodiversity at national level. ♦ The inventory gives new data about the presence and distribution of threatened and rare organisms in the forests. ♦ The inventory gives information to all interested parties where forests with rich fauna and flora are situated. ♦ The inventory work and its logic promote a wider understanding of how forest ecology and forestry interact. ♦ The inventory gives a base for further monitoring of forests with particular biological values.
- 9 - 2. Essence of Woodland Key Habitat (WKH) and it’s protection
The significance of Woodland Habitat inventory in the Biodiversity Conservation Strategy and Action plan of the Republic of Lithuania:
“3.1.2. Protection of Forest Ecosystems To precisely localise actions for protection of forest biodiversity, it is necessary to have detailed maps of forest habitats, and undertake specialised monitoring of forest state changes.”
A habitat is a rather homogenous area inhabited by specific animals, fungi and plants.
A Woodland Key Habitat is interpreted and defined by the project as:
An intact forest area with high probability of a present non-accidental occurrence of an endangered, vulnerable, rare or care demanding habitat specialist species.
The habitat specialists are as a rule listed in the Lithuanian Red Data Book (red-listed habitat specialists). Within this project also species that fulfil the criteria to be recorded, but for practical reasons not yet are recorded in the Red Data Book, for example numerous fungi and crustaceous lichens, are treated as red-listed. A habitat specialist is not considered able to survive in a commercially managed forest in long term. A high probability of their occurrence is sufficient to assess an area as a WKH.
Woodland Key Habitats are distinguished from other habitats by their valuable features, for example very old trees, a lot of coarse woody debris, or a certain forest history.
There is no limit to the size of a Woodland Key Habitat; the term denotes the quality of the forest. A Woodland Key Habitat can be anything from a single, very large oak to a forest area of many hectares.
An area that will soon (within a few decades) become a Woodland Key Habitat, if it is managed in such a way as to promote its biodiversity values is called a Potential Woodland Key Habitat (PWKH).
What is not a Woodland Key Habitat?
The occurrence of red-listed species which are not habitat specialists, but not dependent on a certain quality or history of the forest, merely growing by chance, does not qualify an area as a WKH. This is the case with some red-listed vascular plants and some species on the border of their distribution range.
Threatened species that demand a more scattered forest quality, not connected to continuous areas or habitats cannot be used as a definition of a Woodland Key Habitat. For example, the white-backed woodpecker (Dendrocopos leucotos) needs a certain amount of dying or dead deciduous trees, to feed from, within its home range. The deciduous trees do not necessarily have to be located at one place, in a Woodland Key Habitat, but might as well be scattered
- 10 - throughout the landscape. Occurrence of the white-backed woodpecker probably indicates that some forest stands in its home range have Woodland Key Habitat qualities. This woodpecker can probably not be protected by preserving Woodland Key Habitats only, but by leaving a large enough amount of dying and dead deciduous trees in the forest in general. Animals with large home ranges often fall into this category.
Stability of ecosystem and ecological continuity
Stability of ecosystem and ecological continuity can be observed as well in time or spatial scale. One example of time continuity is the dislocation of ecosystems caused by the spreading of continental glacier. Climatic changes were rather slow comparing with the change of the species generations and so habitat specific species migrated together with growth place. For example, wetland spruce forests have this timescale ecological continuity though during the glacier times they grew in the Middle-Europe and between glaciers they were in North-Europe. The spatial continuity of wetland spruce forests means continuity of community as well as in the same habitats and geographic location. When defining WKH's spatial continuity in other words ecosystem stability on certain habitats is mostly considered. Long-term preservation of continuity in one place ensures the continuous living conditions for habitat specialists
To identify WKH there are used several landscape and biological key elements and indicator species. The occurrence of single indicator species does not change the area into the WKH; complex estimation is needed. For example in dry pine forests there are few appropriate indicator species. But at the same time there occur lots of habitat specialist species, mostly beetles and fungi. These species are hard to discover in a short glance or in wrong period that is why you have to judge by the key elements that refer that area suits for the existence of species.
Why are Woodland Key Habitats important to find and preserve?
Woodland Key Habitats do not occur at random in the forest; there are always reasons for the existence of a Woodland Key Habitat in a particular location. These reasons are in most cases related to the landscape elements, the history of the area and sometimes to the specific site conditions. Several different threatened species may often be found within the same Woodland Key Habitat, but not at all in the surrounding forest. A Woodland Key Habitat is often sensitive to dramatic changes in management, or the lack of management, that made it a Woodland Key Habitat. The quality of a Woodland Key Habitat mostly takes a very long time to restore, if destroyed. The clear felling of a spruce wetland forest with long continuity could well be called an irreversible step on a human time-scale.
For these reasons Woodland Key Habitats are important cornerstones in the protection of the biodiversity of the forest: it is important to know where the Woodland Key Habitats are located in order to avoid unfortunate mistakes and to preserve biodiversity in the most cost- effective way.
- 11 - 3. Work instruction
The work associated with the inventory of Woodland Key Habitats can be divided into three parts:
• Preparatory work • Fieldwork • Compilation work
3.1 Preparatory work
The aim of the pre-selection work is to find the areas that should be visited during the fieldwork – presumed Woodland Key Habitats. No special search should be made for Potential Woodland Key Habitats during preparatory work. They should only be marked and described when they are encountered during fieldwork, for example when an area thought to be a probable WKH turns out to be a PWKH.
During the preparatory work are used: - Forestry databases - Ministry of Environment databases - Ortophoto maps - Coloured aerial photos - Topographical maps - Additional information
The forestry database must always be used for making a search for stands with a high probability of being WKH's, according to certain search criteria. The search criteria used are shown in annex 4.
Coloured aerial photos were earlier used in forest survey and different types of aerial photos cover all Lithuanian forests. Many coloured aerial photos are old but different landscape elements and other easily recognised structures are in most cases still present. If old photos are used the forestry database should be consulted to check the state of the selected stands.
Aerial photos have been taken for many years. In the preparatory work should be used the newest ones, because the older ones can contain already clear-cut stands. Of course, there is a possibility to control that kind of information in the actualised databases from forest districts.
The aerial photos can be used in two purposes: 1. They are an excellent source to find stands with high probability of being WKH’s. Stands connected to landscape elements, stands with uneven structure like old wooded meadows and grazed forests as well as stands with scattered old trees in an otherwise younger forest are easy to find and to delineate. Some training is necessary to achieve good result in this use of aerial photos. 2. The newer aerial photos can be used to check up whether the stands found in the forestry database are clear-cut or not.
- 12 - Ortophoto maps cover principally the whole territory of Lithuania. Outprints or copies in A4 format of ortophoto maps should always be used as the main working maps in this inventory. Where digitised forestry plans exist, the stands pre-selected by the search in the database can be marked with specific colours on the outprints of the digitised ortophoto maps. Such outprints are more expensive than photocopies of ortophoto maps. The ortophoto background gives a relatively recent image of the forests but tree species and geographical structures are not so easily recognised as in coloured aerial photos.
Topographical maps (preferably scale 1: 10 000 and not exceeding 1: 50 000) should always be used as a complementary source of information, when aerial photos are not available. These show Landscape Elements, for example slopes towards watercourses, to which WKH´s often are connected. Maps should be used together with aerial photos because small and vertical objects like springs hidden by trees, denudations etc, are not directly seen from aerial photos.
Additional information Information should be sought from the local protected area administrations, environmental protection agencies and regional departments, municipalities, other foresters and other local people who may be considered to have knowledge of where probable WKH's are located.
Local foresters should also be consulted to tell whether an area that came out from the search criteria has already been cut.
Other sources of information are: - inventory data of the Natura 2000 sites; - orienteering maps; - maps of soil type and bedrock; - investigations made by universities, research institutes, NGOs, various projects, etc.
Logical steps in the preparatory work The first practical step in the preparatory work is to produce field maps. The best field maps are the outprints of digitised ortophoto maps with digitised forestry plans in a scale of 1:10000. Copies of ortophoto maps can also be used. Base map sheets as well as ortophoto plans contain 5×5 km land area and they have the same numeration.
The work to find possible WKH’s should start with the data search in the Forestry database. If the forestry plans are digitised the pre-selected stands can be coloured differently. The result of the search in other sources for all possible WKH’s should also be marked on the field maps.
In most cases, next step is consultation of aerial photos and ortophoto maps. However, these sources of information usually do not show the economical activities during last decades. Therefore, it is very important to collect such information in order to use human and financial resources in more efficient way.
The preparatory work should however be locally adapted according to the sources present and the actual situation in for example the landscape and forest history. You may start your work with the most obvious and best information source and later look over those that are not that good in showing WKH´s. For example, wooded meadows are easily recognised from aerial
- 13 - photos. So the next step is to look from the database about stand age and composition. However, in the large areas of coniferous forests it is much harder to identify and delineate WKH´s, so you can only check if the subcompartment you found from the database is cut already.
Large areas without clear fellings, roads, or drainage have a greater probability of hosting WKH´s, even if the search criteria are not fulfilled. They might be visited seldom and thereby are rather unmanaged areas. They could be found by studying the aerial photos or forestry management maps.
Before the fieldwork starts, all the places found during preparatory work shall be marked and enumerated on the field map that should be visited. This will make the fieldwork more efficient and will serve as a base for the documentation of visited stands that did not meet the WKH or PWKH criteria.
Fieldworker: . Ortophoto map N. …………….
No. Forest Forest Plot Subplot Date of Reason of Data source enterprise district visit disqualification code
3.2 Field work 3.2.1 General instructions
All places found during the preparatory work should be visited. It may help to draw up a preliminary driving route every morning. This route could be changed during the day if more or less time than expected is needed at the different locations.
The major task when you are making an inventory in the pre-selected area is to assess whether or not it is a WKH. You do not have an obligation to find a red-listed habitat specialist to assess an area as a WKH. A well-founded expectation, based on earlier findings and experience of red-listed habitat specialists, will be enough.
Red-listed species that occur merely by chance, rather than because of the structure or history of the forest, are not habitat specialists and thereby not sufficient to qualify an area as a Woodland Key Habitat. For example, a rare plant may show up in an unexpected place without it being possible to say from the structure or history of the forest why it grows there. This type of occurrence seems to be more common with vascular plants than with mosses, lichens, or fungi. Red-listed species that require a more scattered forest quality, not connected to continuous areas or habitats cannot be used in definition of a Woodland Key Habitat. Animals with large home ranges often fall into this category.
- 14 - A finding of a red-listed species outside a WKH should always be marked on a map, described on a report to a project manager.
A specimen should only be taken when a species cannot be determined and when the population is large enough for a small collection to do only negligible damage. The collection should then be carefully marked with date, assumed species name, and a detailed description of the place of collection and stored in your own herbarium or in a state herbarium (Institute of Botany, Žaliųjų ežerų 49, 2021Vilnius).
There is no size limit for a Woodland Key Habitat. A Woodland Key Habitat can range in size from a large single tree to a forest area covering tens of hectares.
During the inventory founded Unique cultural, archaeological or geological objects where forest of immediate neighbourhood does not fulfil the criteria’s of WKH are signed on the map with explanation. Should be described on a report to a project manager.
3.2.2 Fieldwork equipment
• field map (A4 outprints or copies of ortophoto base maps (5 x 5 km) with forestry data where such are available, photo copies of aerial photos, often the coloured stand map and non-coloured basic forest map, scale 1:10 000); • instruction and fieldsheets; • magnifying glass (preferably 10 times enlargement); • determination literature; • small paper bags for collecting unidentified species for later determination (remember to mark the location of the specimen on the paper bag); • compass; • knife; • writing material.
3.2.3 Process of determining Woodland Key Habitats
In determination of WKH's during fieldwork you should follow these steps: 1. Determine of which general (WKH) type the forest is (chapter 4.1) and if it is located in connection to any Landscape Element (chapter 4.2) or related to Disturbance or Forest History (4.3). 2. Consider the general ecology and especially the major ecological processes, like the natural disturbance regime(s), that are described under the actual general WKH type (chapter 4.1). 3. Investigate the occurrence of Landscape Elements (chapter 3.2.4, point 4), Key Elements (chapter 3.2.4, point 5) and indicator species/habitat specialists (chapter 3.2.4 point 6). 4. On the occurrence of Landscape Elements or particular Disturbance regime or Forest history control the ecological basic values (chapters 4.2 or 4.3). 5. If possible try to figure out the history of the forest; this is mainly done by considering the occurrence of indicator species and the similarities of the forest structures (gaps,
- 15 - undergrowth, stand layers etc.) to a forest under the natural disturbance regime(s). Look also for signs of old human impact. 6. Compare the demands, (for Landscape Elements, Key Elements, a certain forest history etc), of the habitat specialists that are connected to the actual WKH type with the current situation. Most of the habitat specialists to consider are listed under the general WKH types. 7. If you consider the area to host a habitat specialist it is a WKH. If you assess that it doesn’t host any habitat specialist yet but will, if it is treated to promote the biodiversity values in the nearest future (a few decades) it is a PWKH. In reality this means that an area will be assessed as a PWKH in the cases when you have been for some time uncertain in the WKH assessment but finally assessed it not to be a WKH; a PWKH is “almost a WKH”. 8. If the area is assessed to be a WKH or a PWKH you fill the fieldsheet and mark the borders on the map. A WKH should be marked on the map with a continuous red line. If the area is neither a WKH nor a PWKH you should make a small note on the list connected to the basemap stating why it is not, for example ”recently sanitary cut” and then just leave the area.
In making the assessment the occurrence of indicator species, habitat specialists, Landscape Elements, Key Elements, the structure, and possibly the history of the forest as well as the overall experience gained in training and calibration exercises are very useful. A beginner will have to rely almost only on the occurrence of Key Elements and Landscape Elements when he/she makes the assessment. It means that he/she doesn’t have to find any indicator species at all to assess an area as a WKH, the occurrence of a certain amount of Key Elements is sufficient. While becoming more experienced he/she can to a larger extent rely also on the occurrence of indicator species, and will be able to identify WKH´s with few KE´s, but with a sufficient amount of indicator species. Even a very experienced fieldworker has, due to ecological reasons, to assess some general WKH types without any help of indicator species; he/she has to rely only on the amount and quality of Key Elements. This situation is especially common in dry pine forests, where the amount of recognisable indicator species is low; the habitat specialists that might occur are mainly beetles that are difficult to recognise. Their occurrence must be assessed from these indirect signs only.
WKH's should be assessed according to the present-day situation.
- 16 - 3.2.4. Filling the field sheet
Point 1 WKH address etc.
Forest enterprise Forest district Protected area Plot Subplot Whole Plot Subplot Whole subplot subplot
Date
Fieldworker
WKH No. Ortophoto map No. GPS coordinates Source data N E
You have to write on field sheet forest enterprise, forest district and codes from classificator. If the plot (forest compartment, block) is in the protected area, the code from the classificator should be written. Then you have to write the plot number, the number of one or several subplots (subcompartments, up to 14 subplots). It is important to write all plots in spite of the measure of part, that is marked. In the row, named "whole subplot" you have to mark the sign "√" if the whole subplot was marked. It is necessary to write the date, the surname and code of fieldworker, the number of ortophoto map in the co-ordinate system LKS-94 (ex.: 64/30 ) and, if it is possible, GPS co-ordinate
Point 2. (P)WKH number, etc.
For each WKH/PWKH should be given a number consisting of 6 characters. The first four are the number of the ortophoto map, and the rest two – the number of WKH. This number is marked on the map, later – on field sheet and on the ortophoto map. Numbers on each ortophoto map should be allocated in chronological sequence. For example, the seventeenth found WKH should be marked out with number 17, but before should be marked the number of ortophoto map (643017) . The ortophoto map number must also be given separately, e.g. 64/30 as well as GPS co-ordinates, if possible.
- 17 - Data source The number of the relevant source from which you found the WKH, according to the list below, should be written in the squares.
Sources of information and their codes Source of information Code Forestry database 1 Coloured aerial photos 2 Topographical map 3 Local forester/person 4 Natura 2000 sites 5 Other maps 6 Other investigations 7 Found at random during field work 8
Point 3. WKH type
3a. WKH type 3b.Concurrent WKH(PWKH) type 3c. PWKH type
Point 3a. WKH type The most relevant WKH type of this habitat should be marked as WKH type. If the WKH is connected to a certain Landscape Element or belongs to a type that is related to Disturbance and Forest History, the priority is to write and name it as such a (chapter 4.2 and 4.3).
Point 3b. Concurrent WKH types If the WKH is possible to classify within other WKH types as well, corresponding types should be written here. On a case when point 3a or 3c is marked as a Landscape Element related or Disturbance and Forest History WKH type here should if possible be indicated the General WKH type (chapter 4.1).
If there are several small similar general WKH types adjacent to each other, your aim should be to consider, and record them as one WKH and only fill in one inventory sheet completely, and then record the differences under point 9 (Remarks).
Two or more WKH could be described as one if, according to the classification, it could be decided as the same major type of WKH (A, B or C). If WKH are decided as different major types of WKH (e.g. A and B; B and C), it should be described separately in different fieldsheets.
- 18 - Point 3c. Potential Woodland Key Habitat (PWKH) If the area is a PWKH the square should be marked. The same types and names should be used as for WKH's (4.1, 4.2 and 4.3) and written on the same positions.
Point 4. Description and determination of the Landscape Elements
4. Landscape Key Elements
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Steep bank of Steep bank of Steep water- Steep bank of river Steep lakeshore Steep seashore Steep pondshore stream ditch reservoir bank 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Flat shore of water- Flat riverbank Flat streambank Flat ditchbank Flat lakeshore Flat seashore Flat shore of pond reservoir 31 32 33 34 35 36 Marginal water Temporarily Intermittent Non-intermittent outlet of raised Falls flooded area Karst formation stream bog pond 41 42 43 44 45 46 Island (<3ha) in Island (<3ha) in Island (<3ha) in Island (<3ha) in Island (<3ha) in Island (<3ha) in mineralotrophic lake river mixotropic swamp bog reed swamp 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 Steep bluff (>15°) Gully Ravine Rill Single spring Springs Springy area 61 62 63 64 65 66 Forest edge with Forest edge with Forest edge Forest edge with Forest edge with Beach ridges field meadow with pasture wetland other forest 71 72 73 74 75 Boulder Stone field Heap of stones Sands Dune 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 Stone fence Burial ground Mound Ruin Open bog Open swamp Open grassland
Landscape elements are topographical and hydrological objects, as well as relief shapes, and geological or archaeological small-scale objects. They are expressing ecological or historical eccentricities of the site that can create appropriate conditions for occurrence of rare and habitat specialist species. More specified description about formation of environmental conditions by landscape elements in chapter 4.2.
Landscape elements are not determined always with the aid of maps, databases, and aerial photos. Landscape elements can be found randomly during the field-works.
A landscape element should be recorded (square) in field sheet. In case of slopes there should be marked steep bluff exposition (north, east, etc) and base rock in point 9 under the general description of WKH.
The landscape elements can be divided in the logical groups as follows:
- 19 - 1. Landscape elements related to watercourses or special water regime:
• banks of river, stream and ditch
A stream is less, and a river more, than 5 meter wide.
• shores of water-course, sea, lake, pond and reservoir
Permanent shores towards watercourses that are not flowing are included here.
• spring, springs, springy areas
To be recorded, a spring must have such a large water flow that it makes it difficult to pass by walking as you will easily sink deep. In many cases a spring rarely freezes in wintertime.
• intermittent stream, ravine, gully, rill, marginal water outlet of raised bog, other temporarily flooded area
Flooding is important because it creates an increased amount of woody debris, a special tree species composition and other important features, like stools. It favours species like black alder and in many cases prevents spruce from taking over. Flooding creates an important micro-relief in the forest floor. It also produces higher air moisture, important for several hydrophilous species.
• Non-intermittent pond
Small (up to 0,5 ha), shallow standing water body, which remains in dry season. The element should not be marked if the water body is formed due to the beaver activity. In such case, the biological key element “the signs of beaver activity” should be marked (see point 5).
2. Landscape elements with marginal location (status) or exceptional environment conditions
• forest biotope island (< 3 ha) in waterbody or wetland
Forests of biotope islands differentiate remarkably from surroundings due to distinct biotope caused by relief, geomorphology, hydrological conditions etc. The biotope islands resemble up to some extent to the island ecosystems in water. Island-like stands make the monotonous woods diverse and give expanded grounds for habitats. The borders as ecotones between different plant communities cause the edge effect and add species number on the landscape level.
The moist and stable microclimate often found near water-bodies is favourable for fire refugial biodiversity values. The geographical location makes the stand more fire-protected. A well-preserved transition zone between forest and wetland gives additional ecological niches.
- 20 - • steep bluff
A slope with an inclination over 15°.
• edges with fields, with meadows, with wetlands, with different forest biotopes
The landscape elements of this group are often related to specific microclimatic and ecological conditions, which are created by ecotones. In many cases the management differs at edges of the forest stand hence it creates variety of specific forest qualities at those locations.
Well-preserved transition zones between forest and variety of other biotopes like wetland, meadow etc. gives additional ecological niches. A transition zone between two completely different ecosystems provides living conditions for additional species depending on both ecosystems; additional ecological niches exist.
The south-facing edges are continuously exposed to the sun and are sometimes subjected to fire. Sun-exposed, old or dying trees and natural snags along the forest line might be valuable features (Biological Key Elements) for red-listed insects and lichens. These locations may provide the necessary conditions for thermophilic species, especially insects.
• boulder, stone field, karst formation, burial grounds, mound, stonefence, heap of stones, ruin
Boulders, stonefields, karst formations, stonefences, heaps of stones, cairns and ruins in forest are important habitats for species related to stony or mountainous environments. Humid biotopes present habitat for a number of specialised mosses and insects, dry and sun-exposed biotopes provide habitat for lizards and micro-mammals. Stones etc. in streams are important to some specialised mosses. Earthen strongholds and burial grounds have often long tree cover continuity due to the existed taboos. Slopes and forest edges may often create habitats continuously exposed to the sun, hence provide the necessary conditions for thermophilous species, especially insects.
• sands, dunes
Sands and dunes are important habitats for many rare invertebrates. The special microclimatic conditions provide also habitat for specialised ground flora. The soil surface is dry and warm compared to soil surfaces in forests and/or with other soil types.
Some of these landscape elements are artificial segments of the landscape, however they might serve as valuable habitats for several forest specialist species. Similarly to the forest biotopes islands (see respective chapter) the stands (and elements) demarcating former agricultural land use enrich landscape with new habitats. The border among different communities acts as an ecotone and the edge effect causes the increase in biodiversity.
- 21 - • open grasslands and wetlands
Fragments of open grasslands, bogs and swamps distributed in the wooded landscape are related with specific microclimate and ecotone conditions. Similarly to forest edges, transition zone between two very different biotopes creates niches for species dependant from both biotopes.
Point 5. Description and determination of the Biological Key Elements
The Biological Key Elements (KE) should be seen as a help, together with other aspects, in assessing an area as a WKH or not and a way of describing the WKH stand. The amount of KE´s to be found in general WKH´s of different types is very different. Key Elements should be considered as continuously changing together with the forest development.
The first twelve Key Elements should be marked if the criteria are met. This means that we should consider the extent of criteria is met, or not met, when evaluating biodiversity values of the stand.
5. Biological Key Elements
11 12 13 14 15 16 Stand with uneven Laying deadwood of Laying deadwood of Many wood Stand with trees of Many pendulous density and structure few stages of many stages of inhabiting varying age lichens (gaps) decomposition decomposition fungi/conks I storey 21 22 23 24 25 26 Four different Many old hazel Three essential Signs of beaver species of broad- Forest fire signs Large nest bushes tree/bushes species activity leaved trees
A stand with trees of varying age in first storey (11) consists of a mixture of younger and older trees. This varying age is noticeable above all mainly in Broad-leaved forests, most wetland forests (except pine and birch wetland forest) and spruce forests. A stand with trees of varying age is offering quite constant living conditions in time framework but they are spatially varied preserving the microclimate and favouring species with low dispersal ability or slowly growing ones. Varying age is sign that stand condition is natural and the regeneration also is in progress. At least it is a sign that man has not interfered much into that kind of forest development process. To be assessed as a stand with trees of varying age, it is not sufficient with single younger or older trees in an otherwise even aged stand. Different tree ages should be characteristic to the whole structure of the stand.
Uneven structure and density (12) are characteristic to the stand with gaps and trees from all age groups. Usually windfalls create gaps. They are a part of a natural disturbance regime, gap-disturbance, which is very important in, for example, Broad-leaved forest, most wetland forests (except pine and birch wetland forest) and those Coniferous forests where the biodiversity values mainly are connected to spruce. Gaps give the possibility for sunlight to reach into dark and moist forests and this creates favourable conditions like high air-moisture and good light conditions for the regeneration. Very small gaps, created after normal self-
- 22 - thinning, are not to be assessed as gaps, considering that the stand is not with the uneven density.
Uneven structure and density should also be marked when the forest has a structure of being a former wooded pasture or meadow where openings remain. The openings may even have parts of the grass sward persisting.
A stand with two storeys of rather old and tall trees, for example 100 and 140 years, should not be assessed as a stand with uneven structure if we cannot find younger trees and regeneration. In many cases, second storey of spruce is threatening with suffocation the first layer of, for example, old aspen as well. In the cases when the biodiversity values are threatened with uneven structure, the square for stand should not be marked.
Laying deadwood of different decomposition stages (13, 14) is often inhabited by specific flora and fauna (insects, fungi, bryophytes, etc). Most habitat specialists of fungi and bryophyte species are connected to the late stages of decomposition while the habitat specialist species of insects are more evenly distributed on all decomposition stages.
The later deadwood decomposition stages are more rarely found in the forests and an even proportion of all decomposition stages is especially rare. Many of the habitat specialists are known to have relatively bad dispersal ability thereby a continuous supply of their substrate; for example, a certain tree species in a certain decomposition stage, within their dispersal range is crucial for their existence.
The decomposition stages of deadwood could be divided into: 1 . fresh with bark; 2. hard, without bark; 3. slightly soft, a knife can be pushed 1 cm into the wood; 4. soft, a knife can be pushed 5 cm into the wood; 5. very soft, can easily be broken by bare hands.
The amount of deadwood is recorded as well as the amount of decomposition stages. If the deadwood is mainly of one or two decomposition stages, for example rather recently died trees and newly fallen logs, Laying deadwood in a few decomposition stages (13) should be recorded. If additionally single pieces of deadwood in another decomposition stage are found it still falls into this category.
If more than two decomposition stages are commonly found, Laying deadwood in many decomposition stages (14) should be recorded. If four or five decomposition stages are found, it is enough to find slightly more than single pieces of the more rare decomposition stages, to make a record.
Wood inhabiting fungi/conks (15) are important for creating different living conditions (ecological niches) for other organisms. Many insects live in the fruiting bodies of the polypores and similar fungi or from the mycelia or the rot that it creates. The fungi also kill or weaken the trees so that they are more susceptible to an attack of other organisms, as well as they are essential decomposers of organic substance. Many wood inhabiting fungi/conks should be recorded, if the richness of wood inhabiting fungi is an obvious and clear characteristic of the forest. The richness should be assessed in comparison with forests of similar type; an aspen forest should be assessed in comparison with what is typical for an
- 23 - aspen forest etc. Generally there should occur at least ten stems, inhabited by large fungi, per hectare.
Many pendulous lichens (16) should be recorded if a notably larger amount of pendulous lichens is present than the average amount in the specific WKH type. In the case when lichens inhabitation is higher than 20 % of the trees we can say we have lot of them.
Many pendulous lichen species have slow growth and relatively bad dispersal ability. Thereby a large amount of pendulous lichens in an area show to some extent the ecological continuity of that area. Pendulous lichens are generally favoured by a combination of rather stable microclimate and rather high sun exposure. This combination is rare and important for many red-listed habitat specialists and mostly we can find it at primeval, virgin forests with gaps.
Many old hazel bushes (21) should be recorded if the hazel bushes are old. Both the size of the bush at the ground level (> 1 m in diameter) , which to some extent tells the age of the bush specimen and the size/age of the single “branches” (more than 1 dm in diameter) , should be considered. A help to evaluate the age of the bush specimen is the amount of the lichen species Graphis scripta found. Single old bushes are not sufficient to make a record, but the amount should be large enough to be characteristic of the whole stand, more than five hazel bushes per hectare.
Different species of broad-leaved trees (22) creates additional ecological niches in a forest. It is sufficient to find single specimens, of any age, of four different species of broad-leaved trees to record it. This cell is possible to fill afterwards on the base of the data you have written about tree storey and second growth.
Edge communities with many essential shrub species and (nectar- and pollen rich flowering) trees (23) indicate long continuity of edges and mosaic of forested and open vegetation. These shrub communities are important for many insects and birds. In addition, some shrub species are rare or their wood is needed for rare insects. Fruits of other shrub and tree species are essential food supply for both rare and less rare species. If four or more species of the following list of shrubs and trees exist in a stand, it is enough to make a record:
Berberis vulgaris Cornus sanguinea Crataegus spp. Malus sylvestris/domestica Prunus spinosa Pyrus pyraster Rhamnus catharticus Viburnum opulus Sorbus aucuparia Padus avium
Forest fire signs (24) should only be recorded, if it is clear that the recognised wounds are caused by mass fire, and not by for example occasional campfire or other damages. In most cases forest fire signs are located in the same direction on all wounded trees.
Spruce is very sensitive to forest fire and in most cases dies. Pine tree, with thicker bark and high crown, is much more resistant to fire. It will survive if fire is not very intensive or is
- 24 - limited to the surface. In many cases, older wounds are not possible to recognise, since the wounds are completely healed and covered by bark. Usually it is possible to find some old fire scarred pine and beneath the bark you can find a charred layer, or there occur fire scarred snags and logs.
Forest fires are vital to fire specialised habitat specialists. The most specialised species will leave the fire-scarred area already a few years after the fire. A forest fire also often creates more long-lived ecological niches, one example is so called silver logs, which are fallen pines, originally resinated and killed by fire.
They are signs of a disturbance regime, which is very important to many habitat specialists. This hard substrate suits to many specialised beetles.
Signs of beaver activity (25), either a dam or tree marks on restricted areas by slopes like pothole and valley, is the base to make a record.
Large nest (26) should be marked if a nest of black stork, eagle or another raptor species has been found in the WKH. The element should be marked in all cases, in spite if the nest is occupied or not at the moment of observation.
The nest site is marked as a point on the forestry map and the number is being given. The data on the nests being found during the inventarisation in the Key habitat are being given in the fieldsheet (point 8):
Large nest Nr. Plot Subplot Tree species Bird species (if known) 1 3 1 2 E 2 40 1 6 Ą Black stork
Key Elements frequency (1; 2; 3)
Trees with holes and Fallen trees with bark Fallen trees without Natural snags (d>15 Well developed stools hollow trees (d>25 cm) bark (d>25 cm) cm) Sp.Fr.Sp.Fr.Sp.Fr.Sp.Fr.Sp.Fr.
The next five Key Elements should, if they exist, be marked depending on their quantity and tree type. A rough estimation of the quantity should be made, rather than a count of every single Key Element (if it is not the unique KE.) according to the following rule:
Occurrence of evaluated Evaluation KE per one hectare 1-5 1 6-102 > 103
Specification should be made if dealing with deciduous (Ksp), coniferous (Klp) or unknown tree (Ne).
- 25 -
Well-developed stools are created in flooded areas. In the damp areas the presence and size of the stools can, to some extent, tell the length of the continuity of a stand. Stools also provide additional ecological niches to, for example, habitat specialists of bryophytes.
Stools, or stool like formations, sometimes can also be preserved after drainage. In such a case they are not signs of continuity of life conditions. Usually we have to answer to the question: if trees in that growth place need high stools – if the forest ground vegetation is not showing that area is over-floated or overmoistured permanently and ground is covered with common forest mosses, the probability is high that it is a relict from the former times.
Holes in the trees are important for many habitat specialist species, especially insects. Holes with a depth of at least 5 cm are recorded. Large holes in broad-leaved trees are maybe the single environment for habitat specialist species in that region. All holes with a bird nests should be included, also holes can be asylum for bats or nests for small mammals.
Laying deadwood is divided: fallen trees with bark – more than half of the bark is preserved; fallen trees without bark – less than half of the bark is preserved. A piece of woody debris that has a maximum diameter larger than 25 cm should always be recorded as either of the different types of woody debris but never as both. A fallen tree that has been broken into pieces should be counted only as one fallen tree.
Snag is dead tree with the broken top of it. A natural snag that can be considered as KE should be at least 50 cm high and diameter at least 15 cm. The diameter is estimated as breast- height-diameter (1,3) or at the point there the tree trunk is broken if the snag height stays between 50 – 130 cm. Then estimating snag diameter you should consider the broken part also.
Standing biologically old trees (1; 2; 3) alive dead Small, slowly With origin in Small, slowly With origin in Normal size Sun-exposed Normal size Sun-exposed grown open position grown open position Sp. Fr. Sp. Fr. Sp. Fr. Sp. Fr. Sp. Fr. Sp. Fr. Sp. Fr. Sp. Fr.
The last eight Key Elements consist of standing old trees and standing dead wood. Additionally, these Key Elements should be specified by species, by writing the abbreviations of the tree species in the different columns. In this way all large, biologically old trees, for example, of different species and quantities should be marked and normal size biologically old trees should be distinguished from slowly grown biologically old trees. In both categories separately are shown sun-exposed and trees grown in open conditions. The quantities are roughly estimated values. It is often difficult to see from which tree species different kinds of woody debris originate. In that case you may use coniferous woody debris (Ksp), deciduous woody debris (Klp) or unknown woody debris (Ne).
- 26 - Abbreviations of tree species and woody debris
Species Abbreviation Species Abbreviation Pinus sylvestris P Acer K platanoides Picea abies E Fraxinus U excelsior Betula pendula, B Sorbus Šm Betula pubescens aucuparia Populus tremula D Juniperus Kd communis Populus sp. T Alnus glutinosa J Padus avium Iv Alnus incana Bt Carpinus Sb betulus Salix caprea Bl Corylus Lz avellana Salix alba, Salix fragilis Gl Other Kl decidouos treespecies Quercus robur A Other Ks coniferous treespecies Tilia cordata L Woody debris of unknown Ne species Ulmus glabra, G
Ulmus laevis V
Biologically old trees of normal size – the size of them is according to their age and growth place. The criteria for biologically old trees can be met in either of two ways: 1) the tree is in terms of forestry mature and not perfectly healthy, for example it may be affected by polypores, insects, or have holes or a lot of dead branches; 2) the tree looks perfectly healthy but is older than referred in the 2 table of Appendix II).
Small, slowly grown biologically old trees are with small dimensions with suppressed growth. The size of them is not according to their age and growth place.
Sun-exposed biologically old trees are trees growing in open situation to sunlight in the edges of gaps, openings or developed edge structures of forest.
Biologically old trees with origin in open position. Trees with wide crowns or branches far down on the stem show that an area was formerly more open. They are evaluated separately from the previous ones. As a rule, they are solitary trees or relicts from previous land usage or these areas were wooded meadows/ pastures. The ecological value of solitary trees is characterised in the description of appropriate WKH type. Essential KE in wooded meadows are mostly huge oaks.
- 27 - Point 6. Indicator Species and Red-listed Habitat Specialists
6. Indictor species and habitat specialists (1; 2; 3; 9)
Species abbreviation Fr.. Species abbreviation Fr.. NECK PEN 1
The species should be recorded with their acronyms in the squares according to the lists of indicator species and red-listed habitat specialists. In the right column, the relative abundance of the species should be recorded on a scale of 1-3.
Degrees for assessing the relative abundance of the species
Abundance Degree Single specimen 1 Moderate abundance 2 Abundant 3 Traces of insects 9
The abundance of epiphytic lichens, mosses, and wood inhabiting fungi (dependant on the amount of suitable substrate) is marked according a following scale: - single specimen: 1 substrate unit (a tree trunk, snag, stump, lying deadwood) in the WKH area, not taking account the number of thalli or fruiting bodies; - medium abundant: 2-4 substrate units; - very abundant: 5 or more substrate units. Recommendations: in the 9 point of the fieldsheet, to specify with what sort of substrate the specialised specimen is connected in concrete WKH (for ex. to specify the species of the tree on which the specialised lichens are growing).
Point 7. Negative Disturbances
7. Negative disturbances (1; 2)
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Still No longer Clear Ruts of working working Recent Power/telephone Deterioration felling in forestry Road Railway Dam Waste Pollution Other drainage drainage management line from visitors vicinity machine system system
Disturbances negative to the biodiversity values should be recorded. The grade of the disturbance should be written with a number in the corresponding small square (1- small
- 28 - negative effects on the biodiversity values; 2- severe negative effects on the biodiversity values).
A drainage system that is no longer working is recorded as 1, while drainage system that is still working is assessed as 2.
A management (cutting) is assessed as recent as long as it hasn’t started to grow mosses on the stumps.
A clear felling in the vicinity has a negative impact on those WKH´s that are dependent on a moist microclimate. The impact is larger if the clear felling is located southeast or west of the WKH. On the other hand, a WKH dependent on large sun exposure and heat will in many cases be favoured by a clear felling in its vicinity and such a clear felling should thereby not be recorded as a negative impact.
Deep ruts of forestry machines and/or vehicles should be recorded as a negative disturbance.
A road, railway or power/telephone line or tower, windmill, buildings should be recorded if it crosses or in some way is located inside a WKH. If it is located outside but in the vicinity, and the impact is negative and similar to that caused by a clear felling in the vicinity, it should be recorded only as such. A road or railway in many cases has also a drainage impact. Then this should also be recorded with a mark in the drainage square.
A manmade dam, located inside or outside a WKH, could have a negative impact and should then be recorded. For example, this can cause over floating of forest area in the case of road or railway dam.
Deterioration/disturbance from visitors should be marked when a WKH is so frequently visited that it causes negative disturbance to the biodiversity values. In some cases the visitor pressure is so high that it causes deterioration of the vegetation. It should be noted that such deterioration is good in rare cases – like formation of sandy openings or gaps is favouring the biodiversity values.
Solid disposals are recorded as waste, while impact of air, soil or water pollutants are marked as pollution. Only impact that is more severe than the background impact should be recorded. This marking will mostly be used when a local pollution source affects the WKH. The type of impact should be described in the text General description of WKH.
If any other disturbance is present, Other should be marked and the disturbance should be described in the text General description of WKH.
- 29 - Point 8. Best Management for the biodiversity values
8. Best management for the biodiversity values Solitary trees in need of clearing Species Species 11 12 13 14 15 16 Cut young No removal of dying Cut bush layer No management Shelter zone No drainage trees trees or woody debris (% of ground) (%ground)
Large nest Cut spruce Nest Plot Tree Bird species % of area Cutting rate % Number of cutting stages Subplot layer No. species (if known) I II understorey
You should mark in the table what you think is the optimum management to preserve and develop the present biodiversity values in the WKH. In those WKH's where a long-term preservation of the present biodiversity values on the actual location is difficult or impossible, for example in areas influenced by beaver dam or in many pine forests, the optimum management to prolong the present biodiversity values should be marked. Some management cannot be described only by a mark in the table. Then you should use your own words to describe what you think is the optimum management. Some guidance in your evaluation could be received under the heading Best Management for the biodiversity values in the descriptions of the different WKH types. No economic, recreational or other considerations should be taken into account if they conflict with optimum management from the biodiversity point of view.
No management is marked when no management at all is needed during the coming three decades. If management might be needed after that period, this can be described as a remark.
Shelter zone is marked when some kind of shelter zone is needed outside the WKH. The exact dimension and border of the shelter zone is not needed to describe, but the shelter zone shall be included in the delineated WKH. If the need of shelter zone is estimated to be of very high importance and of particularly large size that should be mentioned in the General description of WKH.
No removal of dying trees or woody debris should always be marked, except in some cases when grazing is suggested.
No drainage should be marked when drainage, inside or outside the WKH, is harming the biodiversity values. This should be marked in all wetland forests.
Solitary trees in need of clearing should be marked when a clearing of trees and bushes is needed around single large solitary trees. The tree species and number of trees in need of clearing should be marked. The number of meters around the tree that need to be cleared, should be written by you own words; normally at least 2 m outside the outermost branch-tip are needed.
Cut spruce should be recorded when the biodiversity values are connected to other tree species and the spruce expansion is threatening these values. In almost all of these cases it is
- 30 - best to cut all spruce in the understorey. Then different amount of spruce can be cut in the first and second storeys, depending on the actual situation. If there is a large risk for extensive storm felling after a cutting, or the microclimate will be quickly changed, the cutting might be best done in two or three portions.
Large nest is filled if the nest of black stork, eagle or other raptor is found in the WKH. If bird species is possible to determine, the field “Bird species (if known)” should be filled in.
Follow this example when recording. You want all spruce to be removed from the understorey, all of the spruce removed from the second storey and half from the first storey, but you are afraid of to many windthrows. Therefore, you think that half of the volume in the first and second storeys should be cut at once and the rest in ten years time. You want the cuttings to be made in the whole WKH. Record:
Layer % of area Cutting Number of rate % cutting stages I 100 50 2 II 100 100 2 Under 100 100 1 storey
If only part of the areas needs this management, > 50 % of the area or < 50 % of the area should be marked. The size of the area in need of management and a description of its location should be given by your own words.
Cut bush layer should be recorded when the whole bush layer should be cleared, for example around an area rich in solitary trees in need of light.
Cut young aspen, alder, birch should be recorded when young trees of aspen, grey alder, black alder or birch are overgrowing former more open stand types like wooded meadows, wooded pastures. If the aspens, alders, or birches are old, this is normally a doubtful measure.
If the suggested cutting activity is too complicated to fit into the table, or you need to complement the information in the table, you should write with your own words under General description of WKH.
Point 9. Remarks
9. Remarks
The most distinguishing WKH characteristics: 1. Very old thick living or dead trees (oak, ash, etc.); ~50 % of stand volume consist of biologically old trees; abundant large CWD, many habitat specialists or indicators (underline), other values: ______2. Tree species harbouring habitat specialists and indicator species: ______3. Landscape elements connected to the indicator and habitat specialist species (site characteristics): ______
- 31 - Other remarks: ______
All the WKH characteristics that have not been filled in previous field should be marked in this field. Important points would be diversity of WKH types in the case of mixed WKH type (see point 3b); some important characteristics of key elements found in the WKH; distribution peculiarities of habitat specialist or indicator species; other disturbance than listed in the point 7; special cases of shelter zone planning; special cases of understorey or spruce cutting, etc.
3.3 Compilation work
The boundaries of WKH's and PWKH's detected by the person performing the inventory should be regularly redrawn from field maps to entire sheets ortophoto maps (5×5 km; M 1:10 000). The numbers and administrative data entered in a special register. WKH and PWKH boundaries are marked by continuous white lines. The shelter zones are included in the (P)WKH. In the database will be information about whether part of the (P)WKH is shelter zone or not. Range of the shelter zones is decided according to the appropriate environment demands of WKH (follow descriptions from chapter 4.1 and 4.2). Shelter zones will be treated as the WKH. But the shelter zones may not fulfil the WKH criteria. It is included to protect the values in the (P)WKH from exterior disturbance. When the inventory of all forests (except protected forests and protection forests) are placed on a ortophoto maps they should be sent to the State Forest Inventory and Management Institute (VMI) to be digitised.
After the register and the habitat boundaries have been confirmed, the information will be forwarded to the Forest Enterprises, forest owners, administrations of protected areas, environmental protection agencies, municipalities and included into Forest Inventory and Management Plans.
After every three months collected data should be sent to the VMI and added into “Woodland Key Habitats” database. The entry program will be developed by VMI. VMI take the responsibility to gather all delivered data into one database. The connection of the database of (P)WKH and forestry database will be made by VMI. The information of which sites are identified as WKH’s and the boundaries of WKH’s also will be registered in the forest register.
- 32 - 4. Woodland Key Habitat classification 4.1. General Woodland Key Habitat types
The WKH types could either be connected to Landscape Elements or not. If they are connected to Landscape Elements, there are additional informations to be achieved under the WKH types in chapter 4.2. The WKH types can also be related to stand history and particular disturbances. Then they should be registered according to chapter 4.3. Main criteria for WKH is to offer habitats for rare, endangered and habitat specialist species. For this reason a lot of WKH's are established in old, virgin forests and left untouched from management. Biological KE's lead to appropriate living conditions for rare species and species abundance.
To preserve values of WKH's described below no management is in most cases the best. It is presumed that management and removal of CWD decreases values connected to all WKH types.
This division and those descriptions should be regarded as practical tools in the assessment and identifying of Woodland Key Habitats. Every Woodland Key Habitat is, of course, unique and should be assessed individually in the field according to the definition of a Woodland Key Habitat.
List of types:
A. DRY AND FRESH FORESTS: CONIFEROUS AND MIXED A.1. SPRUCE AND MIXED SPRUCE FORESTS A.2. PINE AND MIXED PINE FORESTS
B. DRY AND FRESH FORESTS: DECIDUOUS B.1. BROAD-LEAVED FOREST B.2. OTHER DECIDUOUS FOREST
C. WETLAND FORESTS C.1. BLACK ALDER AND BIRCH WETLAND FOREST C.2. SPRUCE AND MIXED SPRUCE WETLAND FOREST C.3. PINE OR BIRCH WETLAND FOREST C.4. BROAD-LEAVED WETLAND FOREST
A. DRY AND FRESH FORESTS: CONIFEROUS AND MIXED Under coniferous and mixed forests we have to understand all pine- and spruce forests on mineral soil, division of deciduous should not exceed 50 %.
A.1. SPRUCE AND MIXED SPRUCE FORESTS Usually a naturally regenerating stand mostly on mesic or moist, sometimes on dry ground, where at least 50% of the stand volume consists of coniferous trees, and where spruce is the
- 33 - dominating coniferous tree. The forest represents mostly a late stage of succession. It has long forest continuity or a relatively large content of CWD or biologically old trees.
Spruce regeneration naturally takes place in gaps that occur after wind-throws and deciduous regeneration naturally takes place after a forest fire. Large amount of even aged birches and aspens is referring to management, fire and violent wind-throw.
The Key Elements and indicator species in, more or less, fire-protected spruce forests on moist ground are the same as in the Spruce and mixed spruce wetland forest (C 2), and are described there. Typical for spruce forests is a large amount of laying deadwood.
Important Key Elements in Woodland Key Habitats of dry and mesic spruce forests are also aged, large-diameter spruces, aspen, and deciduous hollow trees, as well as large amount of CWD resulting from natural causes and windfall. Presence of broad-leaved (lime, ash, elm, maple) trees in first storey is referring to primeval forest.
Examples of characteristic indicator species and rare or threatened habitat specialists (underlined): fungi: Climatocystis borealis, Dentipellis fragilis, Diplomitoporus flavescens, Fomitopsis rosea, Ganoderma lucidum, Geastrum spp., Hericum corraloides, Leptoporus mollis, Lentaria mucida, Phellinus chrysoloma, Phellinus ferrugineofuscus, Phellinus nigrolimitatus, Phlebia centrifuga, Pycnoporellus fulgens, Physosporinus vitreus, Sarcosoma globosum, Skeletocutis stellae, Xylaria polymorpha lichens: Arthonia leucopellea, Cetrelia olivetorum, Chaenotheca brachypoda, Chrysothrix spp., Evernia divaricata, Fellhanera spp., Hypogymnia farinacea, Icmadophila ericetorum, Lecanactis abietina, Leptogium saturninum, Lobaria pulmonaria, Ramalina thrausta; bryophytes: Anastrophyllum hellerianum, Bazzania trilobata, Frullania dilatata, Geocalyx graveolens, Jamesoniella autumnalis, Jungermannia leiantha, Lejeunea cavifolia, Leucobryum glaucum, Metzgeria furcata, Neckera complanata, Neckera pennata, Nowellia curvifolia, Odontoschisma denudatum, Plagiothecium undulatum, Rhytidiadelphus loreus, Riccardia latifrons, Riccardia palmate, Schistostega pennata, Sphagnum wulfianum, Tayloria tenuis, Ulota crispa; beetles: Acanthoderes clavipes, Agrilus ater, Agrilus mendax, Anoplodera variicornis, Calitys scabra, Callidium coriaceum, Ceruchus chrysomelinus, Cucujus cinnaberinus, Dendrophagus crenatus, Dendrophagus crenatus, Descarpentriesina variolosa, Dicerca alni, Dicerca furcata, Hololepta plana, Leptura nigripes, Leptura thoracica, Necydalis major, Ostoma ferruginea, Peltis grossa, Platycerus spp., Saperda perforata, Xylotrechus rusticus; vascular plants: Epipogium aphyllum, Galium triflorum, Huperzia selago, Linnaea borealis, Moneses uniflora, Polystichum aculeatum.
Best management for the biodiversity values: In forests where the majority of biodiversity values are connected to spruce the best management is no management at all. If dealing with natural spruce forest developing into primeval some younger birches can be cut to make gaps. In forests where most of the biodiversity values are connected to deciduous trees, and spruce is expanding to the extent that it is threatening the biodiversity values, some cutting of spruce regeneration/or younger trees in order to favour the deciduous trees might be the best.
- 34 - A.2. PINE AND MIXED PINE FORESTS Typically a naturally regenerated stand mostly on dry, mesic or sometimes moist ground, where at least 50% of the stand volume of all tree layers consists of coniferous trees, and where pine is the dominating coniferous tree. It has long forest continuity or a relatively large content of CWD or biologically old trees.
The most important Key Elements in Woodland Key Habitats of pine forests are aged, large- diameter pines, sometimes birch, and natural snags and logs, varying in degree of decomposition. Typical for pine forests is large amount of standing deadwood, often in dry and sun-exposed situation. Additional important criteria are the occurrence of rough “crocodile” bark on the pines and large dead and dying pine branches. Especially sun-exposed aged trees, natural snags and logs are valuable. Thereby open places are important since they let the sunshine in. Other features are slowly grown old and sometimes twisted pines (and aspen). Fire-scarred trees and burned woody debris are more rare Key Elements, while pinewood, resinated after fire, is a more common Key Element, since it can persist for more than a century as a substrate.
Pine, birch and aspen regeneration naturally takes place after a forest fire.
Due to natural conditions, dry pine forests harbour much fewer indicator species than moister spruce forests, but they may still host many red-listed habitat specialists, mostly insects. Therefore, their biodiversity value cannot easily be assessed by the occurrence of indicator species, but rather by the occurrence of the Key Elements mentioned above. In many cases, because of successful suppression of forest fires for a very long time, the pine forests on dry and mesic ground today have a rather large content of spruce. They might even have been protected from large-scale disturbances for such a long time that they have gained some of the biodiversity values connected to fire protected spruce forests. The situation is, because of this, often rather complicated, and sometimes a mixture of biodiversity values connected to naturally fire-protected and fire-influenced forest can be found in the same stand.
Examples of characteristic indicator species and rare or threatened habitat specialists (underlined): fungi: Diplomitoporus flavescens, Fomitopsis rosea, Leptoporus mollis, Lentaria mucida, Meruliopsis taxicola, Phaeolus schweinitzii, Phellinus ferrugineofuscus, Phellinus nigrolimitatus, Phellinus pini, Phlebia centrifuga, Pycnoporellus fulgens, Sarcosoma globosum, Skeletocutis stellae; lichens: Arthonia leucopellea, Bryoria nadvornikiana, Evernia divaricata, Evernia mesomorpha, Hypogymnia farinacea, Hypogymnia vittata, Icmadophila ericetorum, Lecanactis abietina, Ramalina thrausta, Xylographa paralella; bryophytes: Anastrophyllum hellerianum, Bazzania trilobata, Barbilophozia barbata, Dicranum drummondii, Dicranum spurium, Geocalyx graveolens, Jamesoniella autumnalis, Jungermannia leiantha, Leucobryum glaucum, Nowellia curvifolia, Odontoschisma denudatum, Riccardia latifrons,; beetles: Anoplodera variicornis, Calitys scabra, Callidium coriaceum, Ceruchus chrysomelinus, Dendrophagus crenatus, Ostoma ferruginea, Peltis grossa; vascular plants: Anthericum ramosum, Arnica montana, Cephalanthera rubra, Diphasiatrum complanatum, Diphasiastrum tristachyum, Linnaea borealis, Listera cordata, Moneses uniflora, Neottianthe cucullata, Polypodium vulgare.
- 35 - Best management for the biodiversity values: The best management is no management at all. In forests where most of the biodiversity values are connected to pine and/or deciduous trees, and spruce is expanding to the extent that it is threatening the biodiversity values, some cutting of spruce in order to favour the pine/deciduous trees might be the best. In some cases disturbance – burning – does not affect biological values. In some cases controlled burning is needed in the management. No dying trees or woody debris should be removed from the stand.
B. DRY AND FRESH FORESTS: DECIDUOUS
B.1. BROAD-LEAVED FOREST Stands on dry, mesic or moist ground, where the admixture of deciduous trees is at least 50% of the stand volume and where broad-leaved trees (oak, lime, maple, hornbeam, ash and elm) are dominating.
It might be an old broad-leaved stand or a since a very long time overgrown wooded meadow or pasture with its origin in the old agricultural landscape. The admixture may be spruce, birch, aspen, grey and black alder. Hazel bush is often present or, in suitable habitats, dominating the shrub-layer. Regeneration mostly takes place in gaps that occur after wind-throws.
Important KE's are: 1) biologically old trees of different species and exposition, old hazel bushes; 2) hollow-trees, logs, natural snags and a general abundance of fallen dead woody materials, of different species, exposition and decomposition stage; 3) giant trees (most often oaks or ashes) that are remarkably aged give a very important additional value to the stand. Old broad-leaved trees with heart rot and old wind- thrown trees provide additional values. Stems of aged broad-leaved trees, and sometimes aspen, extensively covered with epiphytic mosses are valuable features, which also indicates long forest continuity. Richness in various wood-inhabiting fungus species (polypores in a broad sense) is an additional value. 4) open spaces with sun-exposed coarse woody debris are often created by windfalls in older stands, and a more or less pronounced difference in age structure will appear. Open spaces give the possibility for the important and nowadays rare combination of high air-moisture and light conditions, important for many red-listed tree-living lichen species.
As a rule, there are lots of indicator species, providing great help when identifying WKH.
The forest is mostly in a late stage of succession. It has long tree continuity or a relatively large content of CWD or biologically old trees.
Examples of characteristic indicator species and rare or threatened habitat specialists (underlined): fungi: Aurantiporus croceus, Ceriporia purpurea, Clavicorona pyxidata, Dentipellis fragilis, Geastrum spp., Grifola frondosa, Hericium coralloides, Inonotus dryophilus, Junghuhnia nitida, Lycoperdon echinatum, Oxyporus corticola, Perenniporia medulla-panis, Phellinus
- 36 - ferruginosus, Polyporus badius, Polyporus umbellatus, Sceletocutis nivea, Steccherinum robustius, Xylaria polymorpha, Xylobolus frustulatus; lichens: Acrocordia gemmata, Arthonia vinosa, Bacidia rubella, Chaenotheca brachypoda, Chaenotheca chlorella, Chaenotheca cinerea, Chaenotheca phaeocephala, Chrysothrix candelaris, Flavoparmelia caperata, Haematomma ochroleucum, Lobaria pulmonaria, Pertusaria pertusa, Phaeophyscia endophoenicea, Phlyctis agelaea, Sclerophora spp., Thelotrema lepadinum; bryophytes: Anomodon attenuatus, Anomodon longifolius, Anomodon viticulosus, Antitrichia curtipendula, Ctenidium molluscum, Dicranum viride, Frullania dilatata, Frullania tamarisci, Isothecium alopecuroides, Jamesoniella autumnalis, Lejeunea cavifolia, Metzgeria furcata, Neckera complanata, Neckera pennata, Porella spp., Tortella tortuosa; beetles: Calosoma inquisitor, Cyrtoclytus capra, Gnorimus nobilis, Liocola marmorata, Lymexylon navale, Mycetochara spp., Osmoderma eremita, Rhamnusium bicolor; vascular plants: Allium ursinum, Bromopsis benekenii, Bromopsis ramosa, Cardamine bulbifera, Corydalis cava, Corydalis intermedia, Cypripedium calceolus, Epipactis helleborine, Festuca altissima, Glyceria lithuanica, Hedera helix, Hordelymus europaeus; Hypericum montanum, Isopyrum thalictroides, Lathyrus laevigatus, Melittis melissophyllum, Vicia dumetorum, Vicia pisiformis.
Best management for the biodiversity values: In some cases the best management is no management at all. In cases where the forest has its origin in the old agricultural landscape, spruce will probably be expanding, and threatening the biodiversity values connected to the broad-leaved trees. Cutting of spruce might then be necessary. No dying trees or woody debris should be removed from the stand, except if it is needed to make the grazing conditions acceptable.
B.2. OTHER DECIDUOUS FOREST Usually a stand on dry or mesic soil. More than 50 % consists of deciduous trees but less than 50 % of broad-leaved trees.
Abundance of Key Elements and indicator species connected to deciduous trees are the best leads to identify this WKH type. Aspen and birch are in most cases dominants, other deciduous tree species may form an admixture, or there could be different kinds of mixed- deciduous forests, with no dominant tree species.
The forest has often been exposed to a major natural disturbance (wind-throw, fire) or, more often, human disturbance (clear felling and other types of cutting) that is followed by a natural succession favouring deciduous trees. Aspen represents sometimes a naturally regenerated residual of previously mixed coniferous-, mixed deciduous or broad-leaved forests that have been cut during earlier forestry. Self-thinning is common in dense stands. Open spaces give the possibility for the important and nowadays rare combination of high air-moisture and light conditions, important for many red-listed tree-living lichen species.
Sun-exposition and warmth are important for many red-listed insects connected to aspen and birch. Biologically old deciduous trees of different species and exposition, as well as deciduous (and sometimes coniferous) logs, natural snags and a general abundance of fallen woody materials are important Key Elements. Stems of aged aspen and sometimes broad- leaved trees, extensively covered with epiphytic mosses are valuable features, which also indicates long continuity. Richness in various wood-inhabiting fungus species (polypores in a
- 37 - broad sense) is an additional value. Aspen trees are usually infected with polypores and bird's nest holes are frequent and valuable features in these trees.
Examples of characteristic indicator species and rare or threatened habitat specialists (underlined): fungi: Dentipellis fragilis, Hericium coralloides, Junghuhnia pseudozilingiana, Multiclavula mucida, Sistotrema raduloides, Skeletocutis odora, Tomentella crinalis; lichens: Acrocordia gemmata, Bacidia rubella, Chaenotheca brachypoda, Leptogium saturninum, Lobaria pulmonaria, Mycoblastus sanguinarius, Peltigera collina; bryophytes: Anomodon attenuatus, Anomodon longifolius, Frullania dilatata, Jamesoniella autumnalis, Lejeunea cavifolia, Metzgeria furcata, Neckera complanata, Neckera pennata, Ulota crispa; beetles: Acanthoderes clavipes, Agrilus ater, Ceruchus chrysomelinus, Cucujus cinnaberinus, Descarpentriesina variolosa, Hololepta plana, Necydalis major, Saperda perforata, Xylotrechus rusticus; vascular plants: Festuca altissima;
Best management to preserve biodiversity values: the same as for B.1.
C. WETLAND FORESTS
C.1. BLACK ALDER AND BIRCH WETLAND FOREST A naturally regenerated black alder and hairy twigged silver birch forest stands on peat-land or wet mineral soil in most cases with stagnant water. More than 50% of the stand volume consists of black alder.
The forest is usually in a late stage of succession. It has long forest continuity or a relatively large content of CWD or biologically old trees. Usually, the stand is non-ditched or with an old or shallow drainage that does not harm the natural value of the ecosystem. Beaver dams often partially restore previous moisture regime in ditched stands.
Black alder wetland forest is normally characterised by permanently high ground water level, flat terrain, and almost no ground water movement. It usually occupies hollows and depressions often in the vicinity of bogs and mires. The soil is permanently highly saturated with stagnant and oxygen-depleted water, which leads to acidic and infertile conditions. In such sites hairy twigged silver birch often constitutes large amount and sometimes dominates. Occasionally a black alder wetland forest may occur in a place with continuous ground water seepage, either on flat or slightly sloping terrain. Then the conditions will be much more fertile and the vegetation richer.
These sites have usually been forested with black alder for several generations or originated in conjunction with black alder dominated sites. The admixture consists of birch, spruce and, more rarely, ash. A typical feature of black alder wetlands is a micro relief with high uninundated hummocks around tree bases (stools) and among them stretch seasonally flooded spaces which are covered with open water even during a large part of vegetation period. This micro-relief determines the existence of a distinctly mosaic pattern of vegetation with no monodominating species in the herb and moss layers; the microgradient of humidity and light enables the mutual coexistence of ecologically different species. The natural disturbances are
- 38 - primarily storms, gap-disturbances and fluctuations in water level. Regeneration mostly takes place in gaps that occur after wind-throws or tree death. Regeneration of new sprouts from a broken black alder, on a stool, is common. Wind-thrown trees are to be found more rarely because black alder possess rather wind-resistant root system.
An uneven tree canopy and a varying age structure are positive characteristics; it helps to keep the microclimate moist and shows that the forest is closer to its natural disturbance and regeneration regimes. Open spaces give the possibility for sunlight to reach into these often dark and moist forests, and the important and nowadays rare combination of high air-moisture and light conditions is created. An admixture of ash in these habitats provides additional ecological niches for habitat specialists that depend on rich bark in moist conditions. If the stems of aged black alders, or ashes, are extensively covered with epiphytic mosses and lichens, it is a strong sign of continuity. The size of the stools also, to a certain extent, shows the tree continuity. Other important Key Elements of these habitats are aged black alders, and ashes, often with heart rot, as well as woody debris originated from them. Richness in various wood-inhabiting fungus species (polypores in a broad sense) is an important character. A large content of silver birch is a sign of non-continuity.
Indicator species are useful in the evaluation. WKH's of this type are crucial for those red- listed habitat specialists, which have poor dispersal ability and require a wet environment with permanently high humidity and shade, often in relation with a certain Key Element.
Examples of characteristic indicator species and rare or threatened habitat specialists (underlined): fungi: Junghuhnia nitida, Physisporinus vitreus, Sceletocutis nivea; lichens: Arthonia leucopellea, Arthonia vinosa, Cetrelia olivetorum, Chaenotheca brachypoda, Chaenotheca chlorella, Hypogymnia farinacea, Hypotrachyna revoluta, Lecanactis abietina, Menegazzia terebrata, Thelotrema lepadinum; bryophytes: Bazzania trilobata, Dicranodontium denudatum, Geocalyx graveolens, Jamesoniella autumnalis, Jungermannia leiantha, Lophozia spp., Plagiothecium latebricola, Pseudobryum cinclidioides, Riccardia latifrons, Riccardia palmata, Splachnum ampullaceum; beetles: Ampedus nigroflavus, Ceruchus chrysomelinus, Dicerca alni, Peltis grossa; vascular plants: Corallorhiza trifida, Dryopteris cristata, Huperzia selago.
Best management for the biodiversity values: In most cases, the best management is no management at all. In order to preserve the moist microclimate in the WKH, a 20-40 m wide shelter zone probably needs to be left outside the WKH, when clear felling takes place in the vicinity. If spruce is expanding, due to earlier drainage, to the extent that it is threatening the biodiversity values, some cutting of spruce may be the best. In this case, the biodiversity values connected to spruce should be low and it should be certain that this management is the most favourable for the biodiversity values in the future. No dying trees or woody debris should be removed from the stand. Drainage is fatal to the biodiversity values.
C.2. SPRUCE AND MIXED SPRUCE WETLAND FOREST A naturally regenerated spruce, spruce and pine or mixed coniferous-deciduous forest stands on peat-land or wet mineral soil. It is, in most cases, a naturally fire refugial forest. More than 50% of the stand volume consists of spruce.
- 39 - The forest is in a late stage of succession. It has long forest continuity or a relatively large content of CWD or biologically old trees. Usually, the stand is non-ditched or with an old or shallow drainage that does not harm the natural value of the ecosystem.
The forest is characterised by a permanently high ground water level and in rare cases also occasional flooding. It is usually located in flat terrain, rarely also in slightly sloping terrain where moving ground water streams may be present and nutrient-rich conditions exist. The admixture is formed by pine and birch and in areas with nutrient rich soil, by black alder. In rare cases ash may also be present. The natural disturbances are primarily gap-disturbances and storms. Regeneration of spruce mostly takes place in gaps that occur after wind-throws.
An uneven tree canopy and a varying age structure are positive characteristics; they help to keep the microclimate moist, help to produce slowly grown trees, and show that the forest is closer to its natural disturbance and regeneration regimes. Open spaces give the possibility for sunlight to reach into these often dark and moist forests, and the important and nowadays rare combination of high air-moisture and light conditions is created. Many specialised red-listed tree-living lichen species are dependent on this combination. Heart rot and other fungal infections are often present; sometimes making the stems break in storms. The resulting logs and natural snags, together with old wind-thrown trees (mostly spruce) with uprooted stems, are important Key Elements. An important feature is also old, often slowly grown, spruce of different sizes. Woody debris originating from slowly grown conifers, as well as CWD varying in degree of decomposition and moisture, are additional important values. Richness in various wood-inhabiting fungus species (polypores in a broad sense) is an important feature. An additional, but rare, quality in some spruce or mixed spruce wetland forests is an occurrence of stools. A large content of birch or pine is a sign of non-continuity.
Indicator species are useful in the evaluation. If all the CWD and biologically old trees have been removed from the forest, the stand may still, in rare cases, host red-listed habitat specialists and be a WKH. Then the tree continuity has to be very long. This is assessed by the presence of indicator species. Fire-refuge spruce wetland forests are crucial for the survival of red-listed habitat specialists dependent on slowly grown large diameter coniferous trees and logs developed in stable microclimate and continuous shading.
Examples of characteristic indicator species and rare or threatened habitat specialists (underlined): fungi: Dentipellis fragilis, Fomitopsis rosea, Junghuhnia collabens, Leptoporus mollis, Tyromyces placenta, Phellinus ferrugineofuscus, Phellinus chrysoloma, Phellinus nigrolimitatus, Phlebia centrifuga, Physosporinus vitreus, Pycnoporellus fulgens, Skeletocutis stellae; lichens: Arthonia leucopellea, Evernia divaricata, Fellhanera spp., Icmadophila ericetorum, Lecanactis abietina, Ramalina thrausta; bryophytes: Anastrophyllum hellerianum, Bazzania trilobata, Geocalyx graveolens, Jamesoniella autumnalis, Jungermannia leiantha, Leucobryum glaucum, Nowellia curvifolia, Odontoschisma denudatum, Plagiothecium undulatum, Riccardia latifrons, Riccardia palmata, Sphagnum wulfianum, Splachnum ampullaceum; beetles: Anoplodera variicornis, Calitys scabra, Callidium coriaceum, Ceruchus chrysomelinus, Ostoma ferruginea, Peltis grossa; vascular plants: Corallorhiza trifida, Galium triflorum, Huperzia selago, Listera cordata, Moneses uniflora.
- 40 - Best management for the biodiversity values: The best management is no management at all. In order to preserve the moist microclimate in the WKH a 20-40 m wide shelter zone outside the WKH is probably needed, when clear felling takes place in the vicinity. No dying trees or woody debris should be removed from the WKH. Drainage is fatal to the biodiversity values.
C.3. PINE OR BIRCH WETLAND FOREST Naturally regenerated pine or birch forest stand on mostly nutrient-poor but sometimes medium-rich peat-land. It is, in most cases, a naturally fire-prone forested bog or mire phase. More than 70% of the stand volume consists of pine and birch.
The forest has a relatively large content of CWD or biologically old trees. Usually, the stand is non-ditched or with an old or shallow drainage that does not harm the natural value of the ecosystem.
Pine, mixed pine and birch or birch wetland forests are characteristic of permanently wet sites: wooded bogs and transitional mires. They are usually located in relief depressions and on the margins of open raised bogs. The tree layer is usually dominated by pine. The admixture usually consists of birch or spruce, and rarely, in the case of forested mires, also by scattered black alders. A varying age structure is sometimes present. The microrelief is mainly even; habitats with stools are rare, but hummocks of various size and covered with ericoid semi-shrub vegetation are generally developed. The vegetation is typically acidophilous. There is usually a lack of richness in various wood-inhabiting fungus species (polypores in a broad sense).
One valuable feature is slowly grown, old and often twisted pines. Together with woody debris of pines, often slowly grown, varying in degree of decomposition and moisture, they make up the most important Key Elements. Especially aged pine (and birch) trees, natural snags and logs are valuable. Additional important criteria are the occurrence of rough “crocodile” bark on the pines and large dead and dying pine branches.
Few indicator species can be found. Due to natural conditions, these fire-prone pine (and birch) forests contain much fewer easily discovered indicator species than fire-refuge moist spruce forests, but can still host red-listed habitat specialists, mostly insects. Therefore, their biodiversity value most often cannot be assessed by the occurrence of indicator species, but by the occurrence of the Key Elements mentioned above.
Examples of characteristic indicator species and rare or threatened habitat specialists (underlined): fungi: Diplomitoporus flavescens, Leptoporus mollis, Meruliopsis taxicola; lichens: Hypogymnia farinacea, Icmadophila ericetorum, bryophytes: Nowellia curvifolia, Jamesoniella autumnalis, Splachnum ampullaceum; vascular plants: Listera cordata.
Best management for the biodiversity values: In most cases the best management is no management at all. Then we are talking about natural disturbances – forest fires have been quite often guests in these forest types, so this is not a
- 41 - threat to WKH. In some cases controlled burning is needed in the management. No dying trees or woody debris should be removed from the stand.
C.4. BROAD-LEAVED WETLAND FOREST A naturally regenerated, broad-leaved forest stands on shallow peat-land or wet mineral (gleyey) soil. More than 50% of the stand volume consists of broad-leaved trees.
The forest is mostly in a late stage of succession. It has long forest continuity or a relatively large content of CWD or biologically old trees. Usually, the stand is non-ditched or with an old or shallow drainage that does not harm the natural value of the ecosystem.
Sites usually occupy small areas and may form elongated belts and patches on gentle slopes, in areas rich in cold springs or near brooks or riversides. The nutrient supply is good due to moving ground water and/or floods. The tree layer is usually dominated by ash, as a rule with a large admixture of black alder or grey alder and/or birch. More rare tree species are elms, oak. A typical feature of alder-ash wetland floodplain forest is a micro-relief with uninundated hummocks around tree bases (stools) and seasonally flooded spaces between them. This micro relief determines the existence of a distinctly mosaic pattern of vegetation with no monodominating species in the herb and moss layers; the microgradient of humidity and light enables the mutual coexistence of large number of ecologically different species. The natural disturbances are primarily storms, gap-disturbances and fluctuations in water level. Regeneration mostly takes place in gaps that occur after wind-throws or tree death. Regeneration of new sprouts from a broken black alder, on a stool, is common. Wind-thrown trees are to be found more rarely because ash and black alder possess rather wind-resistant root systems.
An uneven tree canopy and a varying age structure are positive characteristics; it helps to keep the microclimate moist and shows that the forest is closer to its natural disturbance and regeneration regimes. Open spaces give the possibility for sunlight to penetrate into these often dark and moist forests, and the important and nowadays rare combination of high air- moisture and light conditions is created. If the stems of aged ashes and black alders are extensively covered with epiphytic mosses, it is a strong sign of continuity. The size of the stools also, to a certain extent, shows the tree continuity. Other important Key Elements of these habitats are aged ashes and black alders, often with heart rot, as well as woody debris and snags originated from them. Richness in various wood-inhabiting fungus species (polypores in a broad sense) is an important character. A large content of birch is a sign of non-continuity.
Indicator species are useful in the evaluation. WKH's of this type are crucial for many red- listed habitat specialists, for example those that are dependent on rich bark of aged broad- leaved trees. Also those that have a poor dispersal ability and which requires a wet environment with permanently high humidity and shade, often in connection with a certain Key Element, depends on this WKH type.
Examples of characteristic indicator species and rare or threatened habitat specialists (underlined): fungi: Ceriporia purpurea, Geastrum spp., Junghuhnia nitida, Lycoperdon echinatum, Oxyporus corticola, Perenniporia medulla-panis, Phellinus ferruginosus, Physisporinus
- 42 - vitreus, Sceletocutis nivea, Steccherinum robustius, Xylaria polymorpha, Xylobolus frustulatus; lichens: Acrocordia gemmata, Arthonia leucopellea, Arthonia vinosa, Bacidia rubella, Cetrelia olivetorum, Chaenotheca brachypoda, Chaenotheca chlorella, Lobaria pulmonaria, Menegazzia terebrata, Peltigera horizontalis, Pertusaria hemisphaerica, Sclerophora spp., Thelotrema lepadinum; bryophytes: Anomodon attenuatus, Anomodon longifolius, Anomodon viticulosus, Frullania dilatata, Frullania tamarisci, Isothecium alopecuroides, Jamesoniella autumnalis, Lejeunea cavifolia, Metzgeria furcata, Neckera complanata, Neckera pennata, Palustriella communtata, Philonotis spp., Porella spp.; beetles: Calosoma inquisitor, Gnorimus nobilis, Liocola marmorata, Lymexylon navale, Osmoderma eremita; vascular plants: Allium ursinum, Glyceria lithuanica, Lunaria rediviva, Matteuccia struthiopteris, Poa remota.
Best management for the biodiversity values: In most cases the best management is no management at all. In order to preserve the moist microclimate in the WKH a 20-40 m wide shelter zone outside the WKH probably needs to be left, when clear felling takes place in the vicinity. If spruce is expanding, due to earlier drainage, to the extent that it is threatening the biodiversity values, some cutting of spruce in wintertime might be best. In this case the biodiversity values connected to spruce should be low and it should be certain that this management is the most favourable for the biodiversity values in the future. No dying trees or woody debris should be removed from the stand.
4.2. Woodland Key Habitats in connection to Landscape Elements
Landscape elements provides additional ecological niches for habitat specialists and the probability to find WKH.
The general ecology and especially the major ecological processes, like the natural disturbance regime(s), in the WKH types are described under each heading in chapter 4.1. The most important Key Elements and indicator species are also listed there.
A WKH assessment of a forest located in connection to any of these Landscape Elements should take into account both these additional values, and the Key Elements and indicator species etc. described under the general WKH types in chapter 4.1. When assessing for example a broad-leaved forest on a steep slope of a river, it should be considered both:
- described in this chapter heading River slopes should be considered aspects for evaluation of WKH;
- in chapter 4.1 under the heading Broad-leaved forest is described presence of biological KE's and indicator species etc.
Landscape elements for several reasons have promoted the development of biological KE's and allowed their preservation. Biological KE's have developed as a result of forest natural dynamics in the conditions where forest has not been managed or it is done selectively and
- 43 - rarely. No management or traditional low intensity management is a warranty for preservation of WKH's. Removal of deadwood or dying trees, as a rule, is forbidden, alleviations and restrictions are introduced by every WKH type (look at Best management for the biodiversity values).
WKH's related to Landscape Elements
D. SLOPES TOWARDS WATER D.1. SLOPE TOWARDS RIVER D.2. SLOPE TOWARDS LAKE OR WETLAND D.3. STREAM BANK
E. FLAT SURROUNDINGS OF WATER-BODIES (RIPARIAN FORESTS) E.1. LOW BANK AND FLOODPLAIN OF RIVER OR LAKE E.2. FLOODPLAIN OF STREAM E.3. SHORE OF LAKE
F. OTHER WATER-INFLUENCED WOODLAND KEY HABITATS F.1. SHORE OF A TEMPORARY WATER-BODY F.2. SPRING-INFLUENCED AREA F.3. SURROUNDING OF CALCAREOUS FEN OR MOIST MEADOW F.4. AREA INFLUENCED BY BEAVER DAM
G. SMALL ISLANDS OR PENINSULAS IN WATER OR WETLAND
H. STEEP SLOPES H.1. SLOPE H.2. RAVINE
D. SLOPES TOWARDS WATER
D.1. SLOPES TOWARDS RIVER A river is wider than 5 meter and a stream is less wide than 5 m.
On slopes towards watercourses rapid change of living conditions is going on: 1) vertically, because there is a change of light conditions and wind, so characterising to the top of slope is erosion and wash of soil, to bottom part of slope is characteristic accumulation of nutrient and gathering of material; 2) horizontally, change of light conditions (sun-exposure) caused by winding river/ shore (lake) jointing.
- 44 - Additional values in the WKH assessment:
Ground water seepage (also in the form of springs), and the stream itself, contributes to the maintenance of a stable and permanently moist microclimate. Slopes towards watercourses, especially if they are on both sides of a watercourse (a valley), give a stable microclimate with high humidity.
The trees and bushes growing on upper fringe of outcrops or appearing at the close neighbourhood of sheer do create a specific microclimate and form special habitats.
There might be a valuable fauna in the watercourse, which requires a shady riparian zone that is intact.
Because of preserved biological Key Elements and appropriate life conditions watercourses might serve as distribution corridors for these, or other, habitat specialists, or provide a refuge for them if ecological conditions necessary for their existence have been destroyed in other parts of the landscape.
Shores of watercourse shores are important habitats 1) for those (often red-listed) habitat specialists that have poor dispersal ability and require wet soil and/ or moist environment with permanently high humidity; 2) for xerophilous species which need warm and dry life conditions on sunexposed banks or denuded places
Inaccessibility and management problems have in many cases favoured the preservation of forest qualities and biological Key Elements. Humid valleys are usually fire-refugial.
Examples of characteristic indicator species and rare or threatened habitat specialists (underlined): lichens: Hypotrachyna revoluta bryophytes: Aulacomnium androgynum, Geocalyx graveolens, Pseudobryum cinclidioides, Riccardia latifrons, Riccardia palmata, Ulota crispa.
Best management for the biodiversity values: In most cases the best management is no management at all. In order to preserve the moist microclimate in the WKH a 20-40 m wide shelter zone outside the WKH sometimes needs to be left, at least from the southern side of clear-cut.
D.2. SLOPES TOWARDS LAKE OR WETLAND Slopes towards lakes and open wetlands are more stable habitats than slopes towards watercourses. The vicinity to open water and open wetlands contributes to the maintenance of a stable and permanently moist microclimate. Slopes towards lakes, especially if they are on both sides of a watercourse (a narrow bay), give a stable microclimate with high humidity.
Similarly to the riparian forests, forest situated on slopes of lakes and wetlands might serve as distribution corridors for these, or other, habitat specialists, or provide a refuge for them if ecological conditions necessary for their existence have been destroyed in other parts of the landscape.
- 45 - Examples of characteristic indicator species and rare or threatened habitat specialists (underlined): bryophytes: Geocalyx graveolens, Pseudobryum cinclidioides, Riccardia latifrons, Riccardia palmata.
Best management for the biodiversity values: In most cases the best management is no management at all. In order to preserve the moist microclimate in the WKH a 20-40 m wide shelter zone outside the WKH sometimes needs to be left, at least from the southern side of clear-cut.
D.3. STREAM BANK A stream is less wide than 5 m. On the banks of forest streams the trees are as a rule higher and more vital in comparison with the surrounding forest. Due to the better hydrological conditions for the growth also the composition of a stand is different. For example spruce and deciduous trees can be more frequently met on the banks than in the main stand which is located at higher elevation. Spruce, birch and other deciduous trees which are sparsely found in a surrounding bog pine forest, can be dominant on the banks of a stream which drain water from the bog.
Examples of characteristic indicator species and rare or threatened habitat specialists (underlined): lichens: Hypotrachyna revoluta, Chaenotheca brachypoda bryophytes: Geocalyx graveolens, Pseudobryum cinclidioides, Rhynchostegium murale, Riccardia latifrons, Riccardia palmate, Scapania apiculata. vascular plants: Allium ursinum, Lunaria rediviva, Matteuccia struthiopteris.
Best management for the biodiversity values: In most cases the best management is no management at all. In order to preserve the moist microclimate in the WKH a 20-40 m wide shelter zone outside the WKH sometimes needs to be left, at least from the southern side of clear-cut.
E. FLAT SURROUNDINGS OF WATER-BODIES (RIPARIAN FORESTS) A riparian forest is a transition zone between two completely different ecosystems - forest and water body, which provides living conditions for additional species depending on both ecosystems; additional ecological niches exist. WKH's of this type are important for those red-listed habitat specialists that have poor dispersal ability and require a moist environment with permanently high humidity, and light conditions, often in connection with a certain Key Element. A riparian forest is usually protected from fire and, if it is wide enough, also from wind. On the low banks and floodplains of a river/lake important environmental factors are periodical floods or paludification. Movable water from oxygen rich environment causes rapid biological decomposition. Accumulation of organic substance is rapid on floodplains and the result of it is development of very fertile soils.
There are relatively different environment conditions on riverbank and behind it. Sun- exposed, old or dying trees and natural snags, also opened to the wind, along the waterline are valuable features for red-listed insects and lichens. Moist and shady floodplain forest behind the bank is mostly with lush vegetation and offers specific microhabitats like log- and stump tufts, stools, and depressions filled with water. Lakeshores are rarely widely over-flooded,
- 46 - that is why these forests are more uniform and poor in species and difference is smaller between bank area and following forest area.
In some cases there is a valuable fauna in the water of river/lake, which requires a shady riparian zone that is intact. Additional ecological niches may be provided if the bed of the watercourse is meandering or supplied with wind-thrown woody debris. There may be soil erosion along rivers in some places, and deposition of soil at other locations.
Best management for the biodiversity values: In most cases the best management is no management at all. Drainage or a regulation of the water-body is having a negative impact to the ecosystem. If spruce is expanding, due to regulation of the water regime, to the extent that it is threatening the biodiversity values, a cut of spruce might be the best. In this case the biodiversity values connected to spruce should be low and it should be certain that this management is the most favourable for the biodiversity values in the future. At the same time there is a threat that other trees and soil will be damaged. Native species will survive even after drainage, if impact is not that big, but extent can change. In order to preserve the moist microclimate in the WKH a 20-40 m wide shelter zone outside the WKH sometimes needs to be left, at least from the southern side of clear-cut.
E.1. LOW BANK AND FLOODPLAIN OF RIVER A river is wider than 5 meter.
On the low banks and floodplains of a river periodically over-flooded or paludified forests are spread. On floodplains also the gallery forests can be found which are growing at sediments drifted into the close adjacency of the river flow.
Natural communities at floodplains have become rare. Stands including broad-leaved trees or black alder are especially rare. Important are also wet paludified or peatland birch forests, which grow on the floodplain perimeters. Also semi-natural floodplain communities, like semi-natural meadows are important for landscape diversity. As a rule they need regular mowing.
Examples of characteristic indicator species and rare or threatened habitat specialists (underlined): vascular plants: Allium ursinum, Lunaria rediviva.
E.2. FLOODPLAIN OF STREAM A stream is less than 5 m wide. Floodplains of stream often are narrow interesting stands acting like corridors, they often grow with a form contrasting to the surrounding forest composition. At floodplains mostly grey or black alder, birch or mixed deciduous wooded meadows can be found as well as willow bushes and less often open floodplain meadows.
Examples of characteristic indicator species and rare or threatened habitat specialists (underlined): bryophytes: Riccardia latifrons, Riccardia palmate, Trichocolea tomentella; vascular plants: Allium ursinum, Matteuccia struthiopteris, Lunaria rediviva.
- 47 - E.3. SHORE OF LAKE Lakeshores are rarely widely over-flooded, that is why these forests are more uniform and poor in species, and difference is smaller between bank area and following forest area. In some cases there is a valuable fauna in a water of lake, which requires a shady riparian zone that is intact.
Examples of characteristic indicator species and rare or threatened habitat specialists (underlined): bryophytes: Leucobryum glaucum.
F. OTHER WATER-INFLUENCED WOODLAND KEY HABITATS
F.1. SHORE OF A TEMPORARY WATER-BODY Temporary streams, gullies, rills and ravines that flood only after plenty of rainfall or the melting of snow. In general the surroundings of such formations are covered with lush vegetation and characterised by tree species non-prevalent or missing in the main stand. Intermittent streams may occur for example at spring influenced slopes with luxurious ground vegetation, often fern-rich and with moss cover abundant in species, and at marginal water outlets of raised bogs that channels the water out of mires.
Rills and gullies are among the most common formations among temporary passageways for water.
Examples of characteristic indicator species and rare or threatened habitat specialists (underlined): vascular plants: Allium ursinum, Hedera helix, Matteuccia struthiopteris, Lunaria rediviva.
F.2. SPRING-INFLUENCED AREA Ground water seepage (also in the form of springs), and the stream itself, also contributes to the maintenance of a stable and permanently moist microclimate.
In slopes occurrence of ground water seepage and springs is often found. In the centre of such a WKH there is a spring or area influenced by springs, where constantly running ground water is smoothening differences of environment conditions between winter and summer and creates a stable microclimate. Usually in the vicinity of spring(s) area soil nutrition and aeration is good. Spring-bogs are vital habitats to several rare species. The influence of carbonated ground water is an additional value, and in extreme cases lime deposits (tuff) may be created.
Forest helps to preserve the moist microclimate in the vicinity of spring area also sheltering against wind. In old forest biological Key Elements of WKH influenced by springs can offer extreme variety of habitats for habitat specialists.
Examples of characteristic indicator species and rare or threatened habitat specialists (underlined): bryophytes: Aulacomnium androgynum, Geocalyx graveolens, Helodium blandowii, Pseudobryum cinclidioides, Riccardia latifrons, Riccardia palmata, Trichocolea tomentella; vascular plants: Allium ursinum, Glyceria lithuanica, Lunaria rediviva, Poa remota.
- 48 - Best management for the biodiversity values: In most cases the best management is no management at all. A 20-40 m wide shelter zone outside the WKH is generally needed in order to preserve the moist microclimate in the WKH when clear felling takes place in the vicinity. Drainage, even kilometres aside from spring area, may be fatal to the biodiversity values. If spring area is a spectacular site or used in another way, boardwalk is necessary to avoid soil damage.
F.3. SURROUNDING OF CALCAREOUS FEN OR MOIST MEADOW An open or, mostly sparsely, tree-covered fen or moist meadow located in a forest landscape on calcareous ground. Their edges are especially rich in calciphilous species. Mostly them have been used for grazing in earlier times. Many red-listed species of vascular plants, bryophytes and fungi are specialised on, more or less, open calcareous fens and meadows. Orchid species may be richly represented.
Examples of characteristic indicator species and rare or threatened habitat specialists (underlined): bryophytes: Geocalyx graveolens, Helodium blandowii, Philonotis spp., Pseudobryum cinclidioides, Riccardia latifrons, Riccardia palmata, Splachnum ampullaceum; vascular plants: Cladium mariscus, Dactylorhiza cruenta, Hammarbya paludosa, Liparis loeselii, Malaxis monophyllos, Ophrys insectifera, Orchis mascula, Orchis militaris, Primula farinosa. bryophytes: Geocalyx graveolens, Hamatocaulis vernicosus, Helodium blandowii, Paludella squarrosa, Pseudobryum cinclidioides, Riccardia latifrons, Riccardia palmata; vascular plants: Cladium mariscus, Dactylorhiza cruenta, Hammarbya paludosa, Liparis loeselii, Malaxis monophyllos, Ophrys insectifera, Orchis mascula, Orchis militaris, Primula farinosa (these species are not used as indicators in forest inventories, they are merely rare species from open fens).
Best management for the biodiversity values: If trees or bushes are expanding, these should be cleared optionally. Calcareous moist meadows often need moderate grazing to stay open and preserve their biodiversity values. For recovery of low competitive species grazing contributes a lot. Drainage is fatal to the biodiversity values, and forbidden. At least a 20-meter wide buffer zone should be retained when clear felling in the vicinity, in order not to change the hydrology.
F.4. AREA INFLUENCED BY BEAVER DAM Mature aged forest stand, in narrow valleys - this means delineated areas, influenced by significant flooding initiated by beavers. The WKH is not considered as a bog plain, floodplain etc. over-flooded areas.
The typical features of these forests are their richness in woody debris of all kinds and the occurrence of standing water. After the beavers have used the flooded area they are likely to move to another place and the flood will eventually dissipate. The large amount of woody debris will, however, remain and tend to preserve the area as a WKH at least until the woody debris is completely decomposed, especially vital for sun-exposed CWD specialised insects. These small water bodies broadened by beavers raise the richness of species of all that wetland.
- 49 - Examples of characteristic indicator species and rare or threatened habitat specialists (underlined): beetles: Dicerca furcata, Melandrya dubia, Peltis grossa.
Best management for the biodiversity values: The best management is no management at all. No beaver dams should be removed.
G. ISLANDS AND PENINSULAS IN WATER AND WETLANDS Here wetlands are understood as all different types of non-forested bogs, mires, floodplains and reed-beds. With islands are meant mineral surface patches inside bogs and mires as well as other patches of different origin surrounded by water-bodies. Peninsulas are surrounded by wetland from three sides. The size of a small island or peninsula should be less than 3 ha. More appropriate WKH type should be found, by its features, if island or peninsula size is larger than 3 ha.
The moist and stable microclimate appears in wetlands. With exception of floodplain forests, other hilly forest edges are opened to winds and are often subjected to fires. The influence of several contrary environment conditions has caused extremely heterogenic group of habitats. Well-preserved transition zones between forest and wetland give additional ecological niches. Rareness of that kind WKH's could rise with a seal of similar forest types from the others.
Best management for the biodiversity values: In most cases the best management is no management at all. As there are continuous natural disturbances (fires, storms etc.) and transitions of ecosystems. It is important to preserve influences they cause, to maintain biodiversity.
H. STEEP SLOPES Slopes in this category are not sloping towards open water although values are similar to steep slopes of rivers and lakes. Forest stands on north-facing slopes are permanently moist or water-saturated conditions. South-facing slopes are continuously exposed to the sun. Springs can occur.
Distinct terrain variations may sometimes be present on one and the same slope. Soil erosion and the constant presence of bare soil are important features, giving additional ecological niches. Sometimes pronounced landslide activity may also occur. The soil may consist of different types.
Inaccessibility and management problems have in many cases favoured the preservation of forest qualities on slopes.
Best management for the biodiversity values: In most cases the best management is no management at all. When clear felling takes place below a north-facing slope, a 20-40 m wide shelter zone outside the WKH is generally needed in order to preserve its moist microclimate.
H.1. SLOPE A slope with an inclination over 20º, not sloping towards a watercourse or lake. The height must exceed 10 m.
- 50 - H.2. RAVINE Ravines are formed by erosion of small watercourses. They consist of two opposite slopes and in the bottom is usually a small, sometimes temporary, brook. In the lower parts of the slopes small sources or leaking groundwater often occurs. Ravines are often found near large rivers and where the soil deposits are particularly thick.
4.3 Woodland Key Habitats related to disturbance and forest history
I. FIRE-SCARRED FOREST
J. WOODED GRASSLAND AND PREVIOUS WOODED MEADOW/ PASTURE J.1. OVERGROWN WOODED GRASSLAND (PREVIOUS MEADOW/ PASTURE) J.2. RECENTLY OVERGROWN WOODED GRASSLAND J.3. STILL MANAGED WOODED MEADOW J.4. STILL MANAGED WOODED PASTURE
K. GIANT TREES K.1. SINGLE GIANT TREE K.2. GROUP OF GIANT TREES
L. OLD PARK
M. FOREST ISLAND IN ARABLE LAND
I. FIRE-SCARRED FOREST An old or mature forest that has burned recently (in the last decade) and where many trees have some sort of fire-scar and/or a lot of burned woody debris is found.
A WKH of this type usually occurs in mesic or dry pine or mixed pine forest, which are most prone to forest fires. Fire-scarred trees, burned woody debris of different species and sizes, and burned soil are the most important biological KE's. Thick pines with “crocodile” bark, large dying or dead pine branches, large diameter pine logs or natural snags are also important Key Elements. An additional ecological value in these stands may be pinewood, resinated after fire, which as a substrate can persist for more than a century. Woody debris of different species and dimensions variation raises the biological value.
Due to natural conditions, there are very few indicator species to be found. Therefore, its biodiversity value cannot be assessed by the occurrence of indicator species, but by the occurrence of the Key Elements mentioned above. The WKH type is crucial for the existence of red-listed habitat specialists, mostly insects, connected to these features.
- 51 - Examples of characteristic indicator species and rare or threatened habitat specialists (underlined): beetles: Arhopalus tristis, Melanophila acuminata; Pterostichus angustatus
Best management for the biodiversity values: The best management is to avoid management. At least partly regeneration should be natural, no dying trees or woody debris should be removed from the stand. The WKH may, in some cases, naturally disappear as such when the burned woody debris is completely decomposed. Fire-scarred forest consisting also of old trees will however in most cases continue to have WKH qualities.
J. WOODED GRASSLAND AND PREVIOUS MEADOW/ PASTURE Wooded grasslands are sparse natural stands where trees and shrubs often are distributed in quite small irregular patches or irregularly scattered.
A WKH's biological KE's are either open spaces with parts of the grass sward still remaining, or biologically old trees, or shrubs, who have their origin in an open position. Abandoned grasslands can be recognised in young forest by single old trees with low natural pruning.
Grasslands can be divided by birth and land use into wooded meadows and pastures. When they are abandoned differences disappear but essential Key Elements are same. Especially valuable are wooded meadows mowed, with broad-leaved trees.
Wooded pastures and meadows have also aesthetic and cultural heritage value. It was a widely spread land-use type still at the beginning of this century.
Natural wooded grasslands or semiopen herb-rich vegetation can be found rarely and for example on small areas of river floodplains, in slightly boggy forests and in boggy meadows influenced by springs. On calcareous soils orchids are common. Open places and a mosaic structure with edges and other ecotones are important features for red-listed insects and fungi.
Examples of characteristic indicator species and rare or threatened habitat specialists (underlined): lichens: Acrocordia gemmata, Arthonia vinosa, Bacidia rubella, Chaenotheca chlorella, Gyalecta truncigena, Lobaria pulmonaria, Pertusaria coccodes, Ramalina baltica, Sclerophora spp; bryophytes: Anomodon attenuatus, Isothecium alopecuroides, Metzgeria furcata; beetles: Agrilus mendax, Ampedus nigroflavus, Dicerca alni, Liocola marmorata, Lymexylon navale;
Best management for the biodiversity values: Since these WKH´s have their origin in the former agricultural landscape they generally need some kind of management to be preserved. To keep biodiversity of these WKH's: 1) Spruce and widely-spread deciduous trees are invading and then regeneration should be removed; 2) If the area has a mosaic pattern it should be preserved. More open areas should be kept open and the edges should be preserved; 3) Old trees and old bushes should be always kept;
- 52 - 4) No dying trees or woody debris should be removed from the stand; 5) Mowing or grazing is very positive for the biodiversity values. If species indicating long continuity of grass sword still exist, a restoration as wooded meadow or wooded pasture should be considered; 6) Then no fertilisers or pesticides should be used.
J.1. OVERGROWN WOODED GRASSLAND (PREVIOUS MEADOW/ PASTURE) This type is merely a forest where old trees from the grassland period persist in a more or less dense forest of younger trees. The old trees are often broad-leaved tree species. The younger overgrowing trees can be different tree types depending on site type, as grey alder, birch, aspen, willows, pine, black alder, and sometimes spruce.
J.2. RECENTLY OVERGROWN WOODED GRASSLAND In this type the grass-sward is still present in open places but overgrowth of shrubs and trees has started.
J.3. STILL MANAGED WOODED MEADOW This is the typical wooded meadow where mowing is still performed.
J.4. STILL MANAGED WOODED PASTURE This type is still grazed by cattle, horses or sheep.
Some types with very weak grazing pressure and dense coverage of trees may as well be classified to a forest of a general type (chapter 4.1). If the forest still is grazed, this should be registered by filling in this type and the alternative classification filled in with the general type.
K. GIANT TREE
K.1. SINGLE GIANT TREE A giant tree (in terms of this project) is a tree that is large enough by itself or together with a group of similar trees to contain a sustainable population of a habitat specialist species. Very old and large, often giant-sized, solitary grown broad-leaved trees, mostly oaks, standing alone or in a group, may be expected to contain red-listed habitat specialists. Giant standing or lying dead trees or natural snags are also included.
The age and size of the tree, the occurrence of cavities, dead branches and indicator species, are the most important features to take into account when the tree is being evaluated as a WKH. Trees with diameter 1 m or more at the breast height are typically giant trees. Large broad-leaved solitary trees in sunny positions are crucial habitats for a large number of red- listed epiphytic lichens, wood-inhabiting insects and fungi. But the size istself is not enough to classify a tree as a WKH. The qualities must fulfil the WKH criteria. Sometimes the trees are smaller than 1 m, sometimes larger, especially for oaks they usually need to be large.
- 53 - Old giant trees that already are legally protected objects should not be registered in this inventory. They can be found in other databases.
The exact location of a giant tree can be optionally measured with a GPS device and recorded in the Remarks field.
Examples of characteristic indicator species and rare or threatened habitat specialists (underlined): lichens: Acrocordia gemmata, Arthonia vinosa, Bacidia rubella, Chaenotheca chlorella, Chaenotheca phaeocephala, Gyalecta truncigena, Lobaria pulmonaria, Pertusaria coccodes, Ramalina baltica, Sclerophora spp; beetles: Boros schneideri, Cossonus cylindricus, Gnorimus nobilis, Liocola marmorata, Lymexylon navale, Mycetochara spp., Mycetophagus quadripustulatus, Osmoderma eremita.
Best management for the biodiversity values: A solitary tree has its origin in an open position and both the tree itself and the tree-dwelling habitat specialists demand good sun exposure. In order to preserve the high biodiversity values, other trees and bushes must be cleared and cut away so that there will be a free space of at least 2 m from the outermost branch tip of, for example, the oak crown to the outermost branch tip of the closest standing tree. If a giant tree has its origin in dense forest, its surroundings should in many cases be left untouched. No dead branches should be removed even from ground, with exception of widely used road or tackling ordinary land use.
K2. GROUP OF GIANT TREES
This WKH type still has been indicate in Lithuanian forests only. The habitats consists of giant trees distributed in wooded landscape sparsely or in groups, surrounded by younger trees, often of different species. Management history of the stands is complicated, the older trees for different reasons survived cuttings in surrounding woodland. Main tree species in these WKH are oak, ash, and pine.
Examples of characteristic indicator species and rare or threatened habitat specialists (underlined): lichens: Acrocordia gemmata, Arthonia vinosa, Bacidia rubella, Chaenotheca chlorella, Chaenotheca phaeocephala, Gyalecta truncigena, Lobaria pulmonaria, Pertusaria coccodes, Ramalina baltica, Sclerophora spp; beetles: Boros schneideri, Cossonus cylindricus, Gnorimus nobilis, Liocola marmorata, Lymexylon navale, Mycetochara spp., Mycetophagus quadripustulatus, Osmoderma eremita.
Best management for the biodiversity values:
The same as K.1.
- 54 - L. OLD PARK Big houses and manors were frequently located nearby broad-leaved forests and were designed to parks. Stands of this type were in most cases rather open with scattered big, old trees. Normally an understorey of invading trees has altered the stand structure in abandoned parks. Traces of smaller roads or paths can often be seen. Ruins or grounds of former houses are normal. Ponds or other pools of water may be present in the surroundings. When these buildings disappear the stands of old trees often persist and can be of big value for the flora and fauna.
Groups of old, big trees can be found also around abandoned smaller houses. If the assemblies of trees are numerous they also belong to this type.
In some cases abandoned parks are not found close to former buildings and are connected to early settlements. It can be stands known as Forest parks.
Parks, without attendant, can be considered as WKH's if in the title deed are considered as forestland.
These stands often consist of a layer of scattered big, old trees, which is overgrown by young pioneer trees and bushes. Among the trees and shrubs there are often species that are not native to Lithuania. Such trees and shrubs do not lower the values connected to native Lithuanian trees in the stand. Foreign tree species that have developed hollow trees or dead wood must be counted as Key Elements and therefore of value. The ground flora may also contain foreign vascular plants. These do normally not contribute to the biological values but do not on the other hand lower other registered values.
Particularly valuable are stands with broad-leaved trees like oak, elm, ash, lime and maple. Trees often reach extreme sizes by age and management, which are very rarely found in the forest landscape.
If only a few trees are biologically valuable and can be expected to inhabit Habitat specialists, the WKH type "Giant tree" should be used.
Examples of characteristic indicator species and rare and threatened habitat specialists (underlined). fungi: Fistulina hepatica, Boletus appendiculatus, Boletus fechtneri, Boletus radicans, Grifola frondosa, Inonotus dryophilus, Stecherinum robustius lichens: Acrocordia gemmata, Arthonia vinosa, Bacidia rubella, Chaenotheca phaeocephala, Opegrapha spp., Pertusaria coccodes, Ramalina baltica, Sclerophora spp. bryophytes: Anomodon attenuatus, Anomodon longifolius, Isothecium alopecuroides. beetles: Agrilus mendax, Ampedus nigroflavus, Liocola marmorata, Lymexylon navale.
Best management for biodiversity values. Since the values are developed by human activities, some management is normally necessary. The old trees with wide crowns must be protected against young overgrowing trees (look at
- 55 - chapter 9). Moderate grazing or mowing is allowed. Contrary to normal park management all dead wood must be left.
M. FOREST ISLAND IN ARABLE LAND Fragmented and scattered woods, dominated by various tree species, mostly birch or pine. Major part of such wood is affected by fringe effect, which creates additional niches for different organisms, mostly insects and birds. These forests often were/are disturbed by grazing and selective cutting. Some stands may have been left without management and can have developed values connected to old trees, dead wood or edge communities.
- 56 - 5. Terminology
This chapter is composed to help users of the Methodology of Woodland Key Habitat Inventory to concur in their use of a number of specialised words. It is the reference to specific terms used within this project. However it is in the first place intended to be a set of informal definitions for field inventory staff.
Woodland Key Habitat (WKH) A WKH has for the purpose of this project been interpreted as follows:
A Woodland Key Habitat is an intact forest area with high probability of a present non- accidental occurrence of an endangered, vulnerable, rare or care demanding habitat specialist species.
The habitat specialists are as a rule listed in the Lithuanian Red Data Book (red-listed habitat specialists). Within this project also species that fulfils the criteria to be recorded, but for practical reasons not yet are recorded in the Red Data Book, for example crustaceous lichens, are treated as red-listed. A high probability of their occurrence is sufficient to assess an area as a WKH.
The occurrence of red-listed species which are not habitat specialists, but not dependent on a certain quality or history of the forest, merely growing by chance, does not qualify an area as a WKH. This is the case with some red-listed vascular plants and some species on the border of their distribution range.
The occurrence of red-listed species with large home areas, dependent on a scattered quality in a landscape, and not connected to continuous areas or habitats, does not qualify an area as a WKH. This is the case with many birds and mammals.
An area with a red-listed habitat specialist species is not a WKH: -if the biodiversity values in an area have recently been severely damaged (for example by sanitary cutting) and a non-sustainable residual population of a red-listed species still survives. -if a specimen of a red-listed species clearly shows up merely by accident in an area, which in no way resembles a WKH.
WKH´s are generally assessed by a method using Key Elements and indicator species. Some WKH´s on calcareous soil are assessed in a slightly different way.
Potential Woodland Key Habitat (PWKH) An area that will soon (within a few decades) become a Woodland Key Habitat, if it is managed in such a way as to promote its biodiversity values. These areas should not be looked for when the inventory is prepared but marked and described when encountered.
Red-listed species/Red Data Book species A species recorded as extinct, endangered, vulnerable, and rare or care demanding in the Lithuanian Red Data Book. Within this project also species that fulfils the criteria to be
- 57 - recorded, but for practical reasons not yet are recorded in the Red Data Book, are treated as red-listed.
Beta-diversity/betadiversity values Beta-diversity shows the variety of species richness along the ecological (environmental) gradients. Beta-diversity is particularly high at ecotones, which are transition zones between divergent biotopes, or landscape compartments like at forest edges, banks of watercourses etc. WKHs usually gain an added biodiversity value when located at landscape elements with high betadiversity.
Biodiversity/biodiversity values Biodiversity could be assessed on several levels; usually three or four levels are mentioned. The level, which this project has focused on, is: the richness and abundance of all species, including all flora, fauna and fungi. A lower level is the genetic diversity within species and populations, and a higher level is the diversity of ecosystems. A fourth level, which sometimes is mentioned, is the maintenance of ecological processes. All levels have to be looked at in order to assess the overall biodiversity.
Within this project, when using the words biodiversity and biodiversity values without further explanation, is meant the biodiversity and values connected to areas with such a quality that they probably host red-listed habitat specialists. It means that the best management for the biodiversity values in a WKH is such a management that in the best way promotes the qualities that made us assesses the area as a WKH.
For the more general biodiversity in a landscape and its values, we use the words beta- diversity and betadiversity values.
Habitat A rather homogenous area inhabited by specific animals and plants. Examples of different habitats are dry meadows and spruce forests of blueberry type.
Specialist A species that is specialised for certain living conditions, for example the beetle Osmoderma eremita which only lives in the cavities of oaks that are at least a couple of hundred years old.
Generalist The opposite of a specialist. A species that can live under many different circumstances. One example is the crow Corvus corone which can adjust very well to the environment, for example eating different types of food, finding different places to nest etc. depending on the current situation.
Habitat specialist A species that is specialised for a certain habitat. Within the framework of this project the definition is narrower. Here a habitat specialist is a species that is dependent on a certain level of quality in specific (Woodland Key) habitats and will become extinct if these habitats are subject to detrimental treatment. In most cases the habitat specialist is found in the Lithuanian Red Data Book. The largest number of red-listed habitat specialist species is found in the lower flora and fauna. One example is the moisture dependent lichen species Cetrelia olivetorum, whose dispersal ability is low. It only lives on trees in forest that has been protected from fire for a very long time and where humidity is high. If the forest is felled, or
- 58 - subject to a forest fire, the species will disappear because the climate will become too dry. It will not be able to re-colonise from another moist area with long continuity for an extremely long time. Cetrelia olivetorum is extinct in areas where forests have been subject to commercial forestry.
Indicator species A species that has rather high demands on its living conditions but not as high as those of a habitat specialist. It is a rather specialised species and shows a certain forest quality by its very existence. It is mostly found in Woodland Key Habitats, sometimes in large numbers, but may occasionally be found outside them, mostly in small numbers. The existence of an indicator species is one indication that an area is a WKH. The existence and quantities of different indicator species and Key Elements determine whether an area is a WKH. An indicator species is normally not a threatened species in Lithuania. There is, of course, no clear-cut boundary between red-listed habitat specialists and non-threatened indicator species. One example of a typical indicator species is Phlyctis agelaea which is lichen growing on deciduous trees with smooth bark and which demands a rather long continuity of high humidity. The longer the continuity of a forest, for example, the greater the amount of Phlyctis agelaea you will find. A small amount of Phlyctis agelaea alone is not enough to make a forest a WKH, but in larger amounts and/or together with other indicator species and Key Elements it shows that a forest is a WKH. Thus it should be possible to find red-listed habitat specialists, such as Cetrelia olivetorum mentioned above. Indicator species are used because they are not as rare or difficult to find as red-listed species.
Landscape Element Landscape Elements are visually detectable objects or features of topography and land use which delimit some coherence of natural and cultural processes and activities, and which may perform a higher probability of ecological preconditions for Woodland Key Habitats. The term has been adopted for the purposes for this particular project and the practicality of the designation will be verified a.o. during this project.
Key Element A feature of the forest that is important for red-listed habitat specialists. Examples are different kinds of coarse woody debris and old trees of different species.
Coarse woody debris (CWD) A collective name for all different kinds of coarse woody materials, for example lying logs, standing dead trees and snags of all different tree species, decomposition stages and expositions.
Continuity Continuity, or more correctly, but often not mentioned, long continuity, means that a certain condition has existed for a long time. Different types of continuity could be defined; here the most important are tree continuity and log continuity. Many red-listed habitat specialists have poor dispersal ability and therefore require long tree or log continuity.
Tree continuity A stand with long tree continuity has been covered with trees for a long time; i.e. it has not been felled or severely affected by forest fire for a long time.
- 59 - Log continuity A stand with long log continuity has had a more or less continuous supply of dead standing wood and lying logs (diameter larger than 25 cm) for a long time. This usually means that for a long time the stand has been affected only by insignificant forestry activities.
Ecosystem and ecological continuity Continuity does not always have to be continuity in exactly the same place for a long time. The continuity must be judged by the demands of a certain species. Dispersal abilities set the limits for what is sufficient continuity for the survival of a specific species. If there are enough sites with adequate living conditions within the dispersal range of a specific species, sufficient continuity is provided. For species with poor dispersal abilities, the range over which sufficient living conditions must be supplied is small. But even these species will have some kind of ability to disperse. If you find one of these species it does not necessarily mean that the continuity of the exact site is long, but that there have been enough areas with adequate living conditions within a short enough distance so that the species has been able to move between them and survive. The ecological continuity is long even though the continuity on the exact site is not long. The important type of continuity to assess when you make the Woodland Key Habitat Inventory is the ecological continuity.
One striking example of ecological continuity on the ecosystem level is the movement of the large ecosystems northwards and southwards in Europe during the periods of glaciations. The movements of the ecosystems due to climatic changes were slow enough for the species with poor dispersal ability to follow. We can talk about a very long ecological continuity for spruce wetland forests, for example, even though they have sometimes been located in Central Europe and sometimes in Northern Europe. On a human time scale, though, continuity of a spruce wetland forest means continuity on exactly the same site. In practice, if you want to preserve the red-listed habitat specialists with poor dispersal ability, you must protect them where they are today, because habitats with suitable living conditions are rare. In the future, though, it may be possible to make dispersal corridors in which the species can spread.
Natural disturbance A disturbance that occurs naturally in a virgin forest. Natural disturbances creating conditions important to many red-listed habitat specialists include forest fires, storms and floods. Because of the lack of natural disturbances in most forests today, for example, due to fire prevention and regulation of rivers, management methods could be used in order to try and imitate the natural disturbances and thus provide the conditions needed by red-listed habitat specialists dependent on these disturbances.
Gap disturbance A disturbance that occurs naturally mostly in wetland forests and broad-leaved forests. When a large tree is blown down, or dies for other reasons, a small gap is created in the forest. In this gap, regeneration mostly of secondary tree species takes place. This is a small-scale disturbance, which creates a varied forest with different age classes in the forest. Stable conditions prevail and the red-listed habitat specialists that are adapted to forests with gap disturbances as the main disturbance factor generally have low dispersal ability.
- 60 - Fire subject forest Almost all forests dominated by or with great admixture of coniferous trees, especially pine, developed on dry or mesic ground naturally burn regularly, and therefore the species connected with these ecosystems are adapted to forest fire. Many species connected with coarse, burned, woody debris; burned, old trees and burned soil are now threatened. Frequent, often large, fires favoured species that could move quickly, and thus the species connected with these forests have very good dispersal ability.
Fire protected (=fire refugial) forest An area that is not naturally influenced by forest fires. Examples are most wetland forests (not pine and birch wetland forest), ravine forests, forests on small islands, etc. Red-listed habitat specialists living in fire-protected forests generally have poor dispersal ability, since this has not been favoured by evolution; to stay in the same stable place was the best way to survive. Moving would only put the individual in a more hostile or dangerous environment, for example in a forest that might burn.
Dispersal ability The ability of a species to disperse to new areas. If the dispersal ability is poor a species is only able to disperse short distances. Dispersal ability is generally poor for species adapted by evolution to fire-protected areas and good for species adapted to forests that, in a virgin forest landscape, frequently burn.
Succession A process of gradual change, during which species composition changes in a community, and one community is replaced by another. .A good example of community succession in boreal forests is the succession after a forest fire. On a burnt area, the pioneer tree species, pine, birch and aspen come first. Later, they will be thinned out by competition from secondary tree species, mostly spruce. In nemoral forests there is a similar succession but with other tree species. Species that come first in successions after disturbances are called pioneer species. Typical pioneer tree species are pine, birch, aspen, black alder, grey alder and oak. Typical secondary tree species are spruce, elm and lime. Late succession stages are vital to many red- listed habitat specialists. Other red-listed habitat specialists are connected with early stages of succession after natural disturbances.
Sustainable forestry Forestry that, among other things, preserves the long-term productivity of the forests, and all the species of organisms living in the forests. The definition used in the Helsinki Ministerial Conference, 1993, is: the stewardship and use of forests and forest lands in a way, and at a rate, that maintains their biodiversity, productivity, regeneration capacity, vitality and their potential to fulfil, now and in the future, relevant ecological, economic and social functions, at local, national, and global levels, and does not cause damage to other ecosystems.
Sustainable population The size that is needed by a population of a species to survive in the long run. It must, for example, be large enough so that in-breeding is avoided and the risk of extinction by random factors is excluded.
Ecosystem The organisms in a community and the non-living factors with which they interact.
- 61 - Ecological niche The ”job” of a species. A more varied forest, with more habitat opportunities for species, for example as different kinds of decomposers of woody debris, has more ”jobs” to offer to different species; more ecological niches exist.
Ecotone (ecotone community) A transitional zone between two different plant communities. Ecological conditions and species composition in ecotones usually are represented by the mixture of both communties, this lead to relatively higher number of species inhabiting the ecotones (see Edge effect).
Edge (ecotone) effect Relative increase in number of species inhabiting zone between ecologically different biotopes (e.g. forest edges and other ecotones).
Ravine Negative linear landscape form developed due to water erosion of loams or other loose soils, usually occurring on the banks of great rivers. Ravines often have very steep slopes. Due to active erosion process ravines increase in size after each larger rain or thaw. Their lenght reaches from tens of metres up to several kilometres. Long ravines tend to branch and later develop into gulleys.
Rift The initial stage of ravine formed by temporary water flows, reaching from several to several tens of metres in lenght and 10-50 cm in depth.
Gully Walley with no or temporary stream at the bottom and with more gentle slopes comparing to ravines from which they develop. Gully slopes often are covered with shrubs or woodland.
Karst pit conic or irregular-shape pit formed due to fall of soil in to the subterranean caves developed in the place of dissolved lime, gypsum, dolomite etc. layers. Diameter of karst pits reaches 2– 50 m and more; depth reaches up to 3–15 m and more.
Marginal outlet of raised bog Small stream flowing out the raised bog (often covered with semi-liquid peat). Marginal outlets often do not form a distinctive stream bed or are temporary.
Dune Hill or ridge of sand formed by wind. Dunes occur in sandy seashores, lakeshores or inland fluvioglacial formations. The windward slope of dune usually is gentle and the downwind slope often is steep. Height of dunes reach up to 30 m and more.
Stonefield A place where boulders are concentrated in high numbers, often artificial. Stonefield usually occur in forests, forest edges or edges of arable fields.
Boulder A rock rounded by water or glacier (diameter reaches 10 cm – 10 m).
- 62 - Floodplain The lowest, periodically flooded terrace of river valley.
Falls In this methodology – short segment of stream bed with high inclination and rapid stream, often filled with boulders.
Sands Areas of sand (fraction of particles > 0,1 mm) accumulation developed due to activity of water, glaciers, rivers, ice thawing or wind.
Spring Area where ground water flows out to the surface. Springs usually occur on slopes or in landscape depressions.
Deciduous trees All tree species that have leaves, including the selected broad-leaved trees.
Selected broad-leaved trees/broad-leaved trees In Lithuania and other Northern European countries the deciduous trees are divided into two parts: the more nutrient-demanding ”broad-leaved” trees and others. These selected ”broad- leaved” trees are: oak (Quercus), maple (Acer), lime (Tilia), elm (Ulmus) and common ash (Fraxinus). Within the framework of this project we follow this tradition. For practical reasons we call these selected trees: broad-leaved trees. In some cases these trees, except lime, are called hardwood trees.
- 63 - 6. Literature used
AHNLUND, H. 1996: Vedinsekter på en sörmländsk aspstubbe. [Saproxylic insects on a swedish dead aspen.] Ent. tidskr. 117(4): 137-144. Uppsala, Sweden. AHNLUND, H. & LINDHE, A. 1992: Hotade vedinsekter i barrskogslandskapet – några synpunkter utifrån studier av sörmländska brandfält, hällmarker och hyggen. [Endangered wood-living insects in coniferous forests – some thoughts from studies of forest-fire sites, outcrops and clearcuttings in the province of Sörmland, Sweden.] Ent. Tidskr. 113(4): 13- 23. AHTI, T., HALMET-AHTU, L., & JALAS, J. 1968: Vegetation zones and their sections in northwestern Europe. Ann. Bot. Fennici 5: 169-211. ANDERSSON L. & APPELQVIST T. 1987: Lunglav och almlav, indicatorer på värdefull lövskog. [Lobaria pulmonaria and Gyalecta ulmi, indicators on deciduous forests, valuable for nature protection.] Svensk Bot. Tidskr. 81: 185-194. ANDERSSON L. & APPELQVIST T. 1990: Istidens stora växtätare utformade de nemorala och boreonemorala ekosystemen. En hypotes med konsekvenser för naturvården. [The influence of the pleistocene megafauna on the nemoral and the boreonemoral ecosystems. A hypothesis with implications for nature conservation strategy.] Svensk Bot. Tidskr. 84: 355-368. ANDERSSON, L., EK, T. & MARTVERK, R. 1999: Inventoy of Woodland Key Habitats. Final report. – National Forestry Board, Estonia & County Forestry Board Götaland, Sweden. Tallinn. ANDERSSON, L.I. & HYTTERBORN, H. 1991: Bryophytes and decaying wood- a comparison between managed and natural forest. Holarctic Ecology 14: 121-130. Copenhagen. ANDERSSON P. 1987: An ecological approach to Polyporaceae species decomposing Norway spruce and Scotch pine - in Norra Kvills National Park and neighbouring areas. Final thesis, Univ. of Gothenourgh, Sweden. 1-31. ANDRÉ, G. (ed.) 1999: Baltikum i förvandling – jordbruk, skogsbruk, fiske, miljö. [The Baltic States in Transition – Agriculture, Forestry, Fisheries, Environment] – Kungl. Skogs- och Lantbruksakademiens Tidskrift 1999:10. ANGELSTAM, P. & ROSENBERG, P. 1993: Aldrig Sällan Ibland Ofta. Skog & Forskning, (1): 34-41. ANTONSSON, K. & WADSTEIN, M. 1991: Eklandskapet – en naturinventering av hagar och lövskogar i eklandskapet S. om Linköping. [The oak landscape – an inventory of nature values in pastures and deciduous forests S Linköping, Sweden.] Provincial Government of Östergötland. ARONSSON, M., HALLINGBÄCK, T. & MATTSSON, J.-E. (eds.) 1995: Rödlistade växter i Sverige 1995 [Swedish Red Data Book of Plants 1995]. ArtDatabanken, Uppsala.- 273 pp. ARUP, U., EKMAN, S., KÄRNEFÄLT. & MATTSON, J-E. 1997: Skyddsvärda lavar i sydvästra Sverige. [Red-listed lichens and changes in the lichen flora of southwestern Sweden.] Lund. AUZIŅŠ, R., BĒRMANIS, EK, T. & THOR, B. 2000: Inventory of Woodland Key Habitats – Report after 2 years of full-scale inventory. – State Forest Service, Latvia & County Forestry Board, Östra Götaland, Sweden. Riga. BALEVIČIUS, K. (ed.) 1992: Lietuvos raudonoji knyga. – Vilnius. BAŠKYTĖ, R., MIERAUSKAS P., VIRBICKAS, J., KAVALIAUSKAS, P., PALTANAVIČIUS, S., ŽALAKEVIČIUS, M., BALEVIČIENĖ, J., BALČIAUSKAS, L., BRUKAS, A., GUTKAUSKAS, A., KURLAVIČIUS, P., PAKALNIS, R., OLENINAS, S., URBONAS, V., ROGERS, P. M. &
- 64 - DUMBLIAUSKIENĖ, M. 1997: Lietuvos Respublikos biologinės įvairovės išsaugojimo strategija ir veiksmų planas: projektas. – Vilnius. BÍLÝ, S. 1982: the Buprestidae (Coleoptera) of Fennoscandia and Denmark. Fauna Ent. Scand. 10. Klampenborg, Denmark. BÍLÝ, S. & MEHL, O. 1989: Longhorn Beetles (Coleoptera, Cerambycidae) of Fennoscandia and Denmark. Fauna Ent. Scand. 22. Leiden. Biodiversity, temperate ecosystems, and global change (eds. T.J.B.BOYLE, C.E.B.BOYLE). Berlin-Heidelberg, 1994. pp.123-144. BJÖRKMAN, L. 1993: Barklevande gelélavar i Småland. [Corticolous species of Collema in Småland, Sweden.] Svensk Bot. Tidskr. 87: 113-131. BLECKERT, S., CARLSSON, K., CARLSSON, L., HAGLUND, T., NORÉN, M. & PETTERSSON, R. 1986: Skyddsvärda fågelbiotoper i södra Sveriges skogar. [Bird habitats in the forests of southern Sweden, that are valuable for nature protection.] National Board of Forestry. Jönköping. BLECKERT, S. & PETTERSSON, R. 1997: Liv i skogen. [Life in the forest.] Södra. Växjö. BODDY L. 1983: Microclimate and Moisture Dynamics of Wood Decomposition in Terrestrial Ecosystems. In: Soil Biology and Biochemistry. 15(2): 149-157. BRANDRUD, T. E., KNUTSSON, T. & SOOP, K. 1996: En fantastisk säsong på Öland. En rapport med tonvikten på Phlegmacium (spindelskivlingar). [A fantastic season on Öland, SE Sweden. A report with emphasis on Phlegmacium (Cortinarius).] Jordstjärnan 17 (3): 27- 42. BRATT, L. 1994: Valuable nature in the Loodi Area, Viljandi County. Provincial Government of Dalarna, Environmental Protection Department. Report 1994:6. ČESNULEVIČIUS, A. 1999: Lietuvos reljefas: morfologiniai ir morfometriniai aspektai. – Vilnius. DAY, S.P. 1993: Woodland origin and ‘ancient woodland indicators’: a case-study from Sidlings Copse, Oxfordshire, UK. The Holocene, 3,1, 45-53. DELIN A. 1992: Kärlväxter i taigan i Hälsingland- anpassningar till kontinuitet eller störning. [Vascular plants of the taiga – adaptions to continuity or to disturbances.] Svensk Bot. Tidskr. 86 (3): 147-176. Draft from the WWF demonstration project in Mezole territory, Smiltene., 1997: Ecological Landscape Plan, Management Regimes. DRAKENBERG, B., EHNSTRÖM, B., LILJELUND, L-E. & ÖSTERBERG, K. (eds.) 1991: Lövskogens naturvärden. [Nature values in deciduous forests.] Swedish Environmental Protection Agency. Report 3946. Stockholm. EHNSTRÖM B., GÄRDENFORS, U. & LINDELÖW, Å. 1993: Rödlistade evertebrater i Sverige 1993. [Swedish Red List of Invertebrates 1993] ArtDatabanken, SLU, Uppsala. EHNSTRÖM, B. & WALDÉN, W. H. 1986: Faunavård i skogsbruket. - Del 2. Den lägre faunan. [Protection of the fauna in Forestry. – Part 2. The lower fauna.] National Board of Forestry. Jönköping.- 352 pp. EK, T. 1995: Fyra lavars förekomst i granurskog som aldrig eller sällan brinner i jämförelse med förekomsten i brandpåverkad tallurskog.[The occurence of four lichens in fire refugial virgin spruce wet forest in comparison with the occurence in fire dependent virgin pine forest.] Diploma work. Linköping University. EK, T., WADSTEIN, M. & JOHANNESSON, J. 1995: Varifrån kommer lavar knutna till gamla ekar? [What is the origin of the lichen flora of old oaks?] Svensk Bot. Tidskr. 89: 335- 343. EK, T. & WADSTEIN, M. 1996: Skogsmiljöer i Östergötland – ekologi, naturvärdesbedömning och skötsel. [Forest habitats in the County of Östergötland – ecology, assessment of nature values, management.] County Forestry Board, Östergötland.
- 65 - EK, T. & AUZINS, R. 1998: Inventory of Woodland Key Habitats. Final Report. State Forest Service, Riga, Latvia. EK, T., SUSKO, R. & AUZINS, R. 1998: Inventory of Woodland Key Habitats. Methodology. State Forest Service, Riga, Latvia. ERICSSON, J. & STRID, Å. 1969: Studies in tha Aphyllophorales (Basidiomycetes) of Northern Finland. Ann. Univ. Turku A., II:40. 112-158. FOUCARD, T. 1990: Svensk skorplavsflora. [Flora of the Crustose lichens in Sweden.] Stockholm. FRANKLIN, J.F., SHUGART, H.H. & HARMON, M.E. 1987: Tree death as an ecological process. The causes, sequences, and variability of tree mortality. BioScience, Vol.37, No.8, pp.550-556. FRITZ, Ö. 1996: Inventering av skogliga nyckelbiotoper inom naturskyddade områden i Hallands län 1995, Del 1-2. [Inventory of Woodland Key Habitats in protected areas in the province of Halland, Sweden, 1995, Part 1-2.] Provincial Government of Halland. Sweden. FRITZ, Ö. & LARSSON, K. 1997: Betydelsen av skoglig kontinuitet för rödlistade lavar. En studie av halländsk bokskog. [The significance of long forest continuity to red-listed lichens. A study of beech forest in the province of Halland, Sweden.]Svensk Bot. Tidskr. 91: 241-262. FROM, J. & DELIN, A. (eds.), 1995: Art- och biotopbevarande i skogen med utgångspunkt från Gävleborgs län. [Species- and Habitat protection in forests with respect to the province of Gävleborg.] County Forestry Board of Gävleborg, Gävle. - 288 pp. GRICIUS, A. & MATELIS, A. 1996: Afiloforiečiai (Aphyllophorales). – In: MINKEVIČIUS A., URBONAS V. (ed.), Lietuvos grybai, 6(2). – Vilnius. GURSKAS, A. 1997: Lietuvos sausumos sraigės. – Kaunas. GUSTAFSSON, L. 1999: Tankarna bakom skogsbrukets indikatorarter. [Thoughts behind the use of indicator species in practical forestry in Sweden.] – Svensk Bot. Tidskr. 92:273- 281. Lund. GUSTAFSSON, L. & HALLINGBÄCK, T. 1988: Bryophyte flora and vegetation of managed and virgin coniferous forests in South-West Sweden. Biological Conservation: 44, 283-300. GUSTAFSSON, L., FISKESJÖ, A., HALLINGBÄCK, T., INGEHÖLG, T. & PETTERSSON, B. 1992: Semi-natural deciduous broadleaved woods in southern Sweden – habitat factors of importance to some bryophyte species. Biological Conservation: 59, 175-181. GÄRDENFORS, U. & BARANOWSKI, R. 1992. Skalbaggar anpassade till öppna respektive slutna ädellövskogar föredrar olika trädslag. [Beetles living in open deciduous forests prefer different tree species than those living in dense forests.]Ent. Tidskr. 113(1-2): 1-11. HAGSTRÖM, M. 1998: Ekologiska aspekter på några vedlevande mossor och svampar. [Ecological aspects of some wood-living bryophytes and polypores.] Diploma work, Kalmar University. HALLINGBÄCK T. 1991: Mossor som indikerar skydsvärd skog. [Bryophytes indicating high nature conservation values in Swedish woodland sites.] Svensk. Bot. Tidskr. 85: 321- 332. HALINGBÄCK, T. 1992: Sveriges boreala mossflora i ett internationellt perspektiv. [The boreal bryophyte flora of Sweden in an international perspective]. Lund, Svensk. Bot. Tidskr. 86: 177-184. HALLINGBÄCK, T. 1994: Ekologisk katalog över storsvampar. [The macrofungi of Sweden and their ecology.] ArtDatabanken, SLU, Uppsala. HALLINGBÄCK, T. 1995: Ekologisk katalog över lavar. [The lichens of Sweden and their ecology.] ArtDatabanken, SLU, Uppsala.
- 66 - HALLINGBÄCK, T. 1996: Ekologisk katalog över mossor. [The bryophytes of Sweden and their ecology.] ArtDatabanken, SLU, Uppsala. HALLINGBÄCK, T. (ed.) 1998. Rödlistade mossor i Sverige-Artfakta. [Swedish Red Data Book of Bryophytes] ArtDatabanken, SLU, Uppsala. HALLINGBÄCK, T. & HOLMÅSEN, I. 1991: Mossor. En fälthandbok. [Bryophytes. A field guide.] Stockholm, Sweden.- 288. HALLINGBÄCK, T., NILSSON, S.G., NORÉN, M. & RUDQVIST, L. 1993: Swamp forests and woodland key-habitats in Latvia. Report from a field study tour in Latvia 1993.- National Board of Forestry, Sweden. HALLINGBÄCK, T. & WEIBULL, H. 1996: En värdepyramid av mossor för naturvärdesbedömning av ädellövskog. [Bryophytes indicating deciduous forsest stands important for nature conservation in Southern Sweden.] Svensk Bot. Tidskr. 90: 129-140. Lund. HANSSON, L. (ed) 1992: Ecological principals of nature conservation. Elsevier applied science. London and New York. HOFGAARD, A. 1993: 50 years change in a Swedish boreal old-growth Picea abies forest. Journal of Vegetation Science 4:773-782. Uppsala, Sweden. HULTENGREN, S. 1995: Något om lavfloran på en västsvensk ek. [The lichen flora on a giant oak in Västergötland, W sweden.]Svensk Bot. Tidskr. 89: 165-170. HULTENGREN, S., PLEIJEL, H. & HOLMÉR, M. 1997: Ekjättar-historia, naturvärden och vård. [Giant oaks - history, nature values and management.] Uddevalla. HULTGREN, B. 1995: Kontrolltaxering av nyckelbiotoper. [Examination of the Woodland Key Habitat Inventory in Sweden.] National Board of Forestry. Announcement 3, 1995. Jönköping. HULTGREN, B. 2001: Kontrollinventering av nyckelbiotoper år 2000. [Examination of the Woodland Key Habitat Inventory in Sweden year 2000.] – National Board of Forestry. Announcement 3, 2001. INGELÖG, T., ANDERSSON, R. & TJERNBERG, M. (eds.) 1993: Red Data Book of the Baltic Region. Part 1. Lists of threatened vascular plants and vertebrates. Swedish Threatened Species Unit, Uppsala & Institute of Biology, Riga. INGELÖG, T., THOR, G. & GUSTAFSSON, L. (eds.) 1987: Floravård i skogsbruket. Del 2 – Artdel. [Protection of the flora in Forestry. – Part 2. Species.] 2 ed. National Board of Forestry. Jönköping. INGELÖG, T., THOR, G., HALLINGBÄCK, T., ANDERSSON, R. & ARONSSON, M. (eds.) 1993. Floravård i jordbrukslandskapet-skyddsvärda växter. [Protection of the flora in the agricultural landscape – plants that are valuable for protection.] Lund. INGERPUU, N., KALDA, A., KANNUKENE, L., KRALL, H., LEIS, M. & VELLAK, K. 1994: Eesti Sammalde Nimestik. [List of the Estonian Bryophytes.] Abiks loodusevaatlejale 94. INGERPUU, N. & VELLAK, K. (eds.) 1998: Eesti sammalde määraja. [Flora of the Estonian bryophytes.] EPMÜ Zooloogia ja Botaanika Instituudis, Eesti Loodusfoto, Tartu. JAHN H. 1979: Pilze die an Holz wachsen.- Detmold.- 268 S. JANSSON, N. & ANTONSSON, K. 1995: Eklandskapet som miljöövervakningsobjekt. [The oak landscape as a monitoring area.] Provincial Government of Östergötland. JOHANSSON, P. 1998: Svampar och epifytiska lavar i gotländska lövmarker. [Fungi and epiphytic lichens in deciduous forests on Gotland.] County Board of Gotland. Livsmiljöenheten. Report 5, 1998. JOHANSSON, T. & KNUTSSON, T. 1994: Gammelekslavar på Öland – resultat av inventeringar 1993-94. [Lichens on old oaks on Öland, Sweden.] Krutbrännaren 3 (2): 31-37. Sweden. JUKONIENĖ, I.1996: Rare and threatened bryophyte species in Lithuania. – Botanica lithuanica, 2(4): 327–341.
- 67 - KARAZIJA, S. 1988: Lietuvos miškų tipai. – Vilnius. KARLSSON, J., NORÉN, M. & WESTER, J. 1995: Key Habitats in Woodland. National Board of Forestry, Sweden. KARPOVAS, G. & SOLOVJOVAS, A. 1987: Fizinės geografijos žodynas–žinynas. – Kaunas. KARSTRÖM, M. 1992a: Steget före- en presentation. [The project One step ahead- a presentation.] Svensk Bot. Tidskr. 86 (3): 103- 114. Lund. KARSTRÖM M. 1992b: Steget före i det glömda landet. [Habitats and rare species in virgin forests of northernmost Sweden]. Svensk Bot. Tidskr. 86 (3): 115- 146. Lund. KARSTRÖM, M. 1993: Indikatorarter som biologisk inventeringsmetod. I Indikatorarter för identifiering av naturskogar i Norrbotten [Indicator species as a biological inventory method. In Indicator species for the identification of natural forests in the province of Norrbotten, Sweden.] (G. A. OLSSON and M. GRANSBERG, eds.) pp 19-96. Swedish Environmental Protection Agency Report 4276. KERNEY, M.P., CAMERON, R.A.D. & JUNGBLUTH, J.H. 1983: Die Landschnecken Nord- und Mitteleuropas.- Hamburg, Berlin ; Paul Parey. - S.384 KOTIRANTA, H. & NIEMELÄ, T. 1981: Composition of the polypore communities of four forest areas in southern Central Finland. Karstenia 21: 31-48. KOTIRANTA, H. & NIEMELÄ, T. 1996: Uhanalaiset käävät Suomessa (Threatened polypores in Finland).- Helsinki.- 184 p. KROG, H., ÖSTHAGEN, H. & TÖNSBERG, T. 1994: Norske busk- og bladlav. [Norwegian flora of macro lichens.] Oslo. KÜLVIK, M. (ed.). 1998: Biodiversity management strategy for commercial forests in Estonia. Estonian Forestry Development Programme. Tartu. 173p. /Käsikiri. Eesti Metsanduse Arenguprogrammi tellimus/ LAAKA, S. 1992: The threatened epixylic bryophytes in old primeval forests in Finland. Biological Conservation, 59, 151-154. LĀRMANIS, V., PRIEDÎTIS, N. & RUDZĪTE, M. 2000: Mežaudžu atslēgas biotopu rokasgrāmata. – Valsts meža dienests. Riga. LARSSON, K.H. (ed.) 1997: Rödlistade svampar i Sverige- Artfakta. [Swedish Red Data Book of Fungi 1997]. ArtDatabanken, SLU, Uppsala. LILLELEHT, V. (ed.) 1998: Eesti Punane Raamat. Ohustatud seened, taimed ja loomad. [Red Data Book of Estonia. Threatened Fungi, Plants and Animals.]. Eesti Teaduste Akadeemia Looduskaitse Komisjon. Tartu. LEKAVIČIUS, A. 1989: Vadovas Lietuvos augalams pažinti. – Vilnius. Lietuvos aplinkos apsaugos strategija. – Vilnius, 1996. Lietuvos aplinkos apsaugos strategija: veiksmų programa. – Vilnius, 1996. Lietuvos Raudonoji knyga. – Vilnius.1992 Lietuvos Respublikos aplinkos apsaugos įstatymas (1992 m. sausio 21 d., I-2223). – Valstybės žinios,1992, 5-75. Lietuvos respublikos aplinkos ministro įsakymas dėl į Lietuvos raudonąją knygą įrašytų saugomų gyvūnų, augalų ir grybų rūšių sąrašo patvirtinimo (2000 m. liepos 20 d. Nr. 306). – Valstybės žinios, 2000, Nr. 66-1998. Lietuvos Respublikos saugomų teritorijų įstatymas (1993 m. lapkričio 9 d., I-301). – Valstybės žinios,1993, 63-1188. Lietuvos saugomų teritorijų sistemos vystymo strategija. – Vilnius, 2000. Lietuvos TSR flora. I–VI. – Vilnius, 1959–1988. LIKHAREV, I. M. & RAMMEL’MEIER, E. S. 1952: Nazemnye moljuski fauny SSSR. – Leningrad. LINDBLOM, L. & MÅREBY, J. 1989: Igenväxningens inverkan på lavfloran på ekstammar. [The effect of overgrowing on the lichen flora of oaks.]Graphis Scripta 5: 53-59.
- 68 - MASING, V. & PAAL, J. 1998: Estniska våtmarker – klassificering och biodiversitet. [Estonian wetlands – classification and biodiversity.] Svensk Bot. Tidskr. 92: 147-161. Lund. MARTIN, O. 1989: Smaeldere fra gammel lövskov i danmark. [Click beetles (Coleoptera, Elateridae) from old deciduous forests in Denmark. Ent. Meddr. 57, 1-2, 1-107. Copenhagen, Denmark. MAZELAITIS, J. 1976: Lietuvos TSR Afiloforiečių eilės grybai. – Vilnius. McCullough, H. 1948: Plant succession on fallen logs in a virgin spruce-fir forest. Ecology, Vol.29, No.4, pp. 508-513. MINKEVIČIUS, A. 1955: Vadovas Lietuvos TSR miškų, pievų ir pelkių samanoms pažinti. – Vilnius. MOBERG, R. & HOLMÅSEN, I. 1985: Lavar – en fälthandbok. [Lichens. A field guide.] Stockholm. MÖLLER, P.F. 1997: Biologisk mangfoldighed i dansk naturskov. En sammenligning mellem danske natur- og kulturskove. [Biodiversity in natural forests in Denmark. A comparison between natural and planted forests.] Udarbejdet for WWF Verdennaturfonden. Danmarks og Gr¸nlands Geologiske Unders¸gelse Rapport 1997/41.- 209 pp. MUELLER-DOMBOIS, D. & ELLENBERG H. 1974: Aims and methods of vegetation ecology. - 547 pp. Wiley & Sons, New York et al. Naturskogar i Norden: Nord 1994: 7.- 112 pp. MOTIEJŪNAITĖ, J. 1999: Dzūkijos Nacionalinio parko kerpės ir su jomis susiję grybai. – Botanica Lithuanica, 5(2): 137–153. MOTIEJŪNAITĖ, J. 1999: Checklist of lichens and allied fungi of Lithuania. – Botanica Lithuanica 5(3):251-269. MOTIEJŪNAITĖ, J. 2000: Viešvilės rezervato kerpės ir su jomis susiję grybai. – Botanica Lithuanica, 6(3): 203–216. MOTIEJŪNAITĖ, J., NORDIN A., ZALEWSKA A., BJELLAND T., HEDENÅS H., WESTBERG M., HEIDMARSSON S. & PRIGODINA I. 1998: Materials on lichens and allied fungi of Neringa National Park. – Botanica Lithuanica, 4(3): 285–305. MOTIEJŪNAITĖ ,J. 2002: Kerpės. Lapiškosios ir krūmiškosios rūšys. – Kn.: Lietuvos grybai 13(1). – Vilnius. NAUJALIS, J., KALINAUSKAITĖ, N. & GRINEVIČIENĖ, M., 1995: Vadovas Lietuvos kerpsamanėms pažinti. – Vilnius. NIEMELÄ T., RENVALL P. & PENTTILÄ R. 1995: Interactions of fungi at late stages of wood decomposition. Ann. Bot. Fennici.32: 141-152. NIKLASSON, M. & KARLSSON, M. 1997: Brandhistorik i Murstensdalen. [Forest fire history in Murstensdalen.] Provincial Government of Örebro, Sweden, Publication nr 1997.1. NILSSON, S.G. 1997: Biologisk mångfald under tusen år i det sydsvenska kulturlandskapet. [Biodiversity over the last one thousand years in the cultural landscape of southernmost Sweden.] Svensk Bot. Tidskr. 91: 65-75. NILSSON, S.G., ARUP, U., BARANOWSKI, R. & EKMAN, S. 1994: Trädbundna lavar och skalbaggar i ålderdomliga kulturlandskap. [Tree-dependent lichens and beetles in old- fashioned agricultural landscapes] Svensk Bot. Tidskr. 88:1-12. Lund. NILSSON, S.G. & BARANOWSKI, R. 1993: Skogshistorikens betydelse för artsammansättning av vedskalbaggar i urskogsartad blandskog. [Species composition of wood beetles in an unmanaged, mixed forest in relation to forest history.] Ent. Tidskr. 114 (4): 133-146. Uppsala. NILSSON, S.G. & BARANOWSKI, R. 1994: Indikatorer på jätteträdskontinuitet – svenska förekomster av knäppare som är beroende av grova, levande träd. [Indicators of megatree continuity – Swedish distributions of click beetles (Coleoptera, Elateridae) dependent on hollow trees.] Ent. Tidskr. 115: 81-97.
- 69 - NILSSON, S.G. & BARANOWSKI, R. 1996: Förändringar i utbredning av den boreala skogens vedlevande knäppare. [Changes in the Swedish distribution of click beetles (Elateridae) occuring in the boreal forest.] Ent. Tidskr. 117(3): 87-101. NILSSON, S.G. & BARANOWSKI, R. 1997: Förändringar i utbredning av sydliga vedknäppare i Sverige. [Changes in the distribution of southern click beetles (Elateridae) dependent on dead trees in Sweden.] Ent. Tidskr. 118(2-3): 73-98. Uppsala. NITARE, J. & NOREN, M. 1992: Nyckelbiotoper kartläggs i nytt projekt vid Skogsstyrelsen. [Woodland key-habitats of rare and endangered species will be mapped in a new project of the Swedish National Board of Forestry.] Svensk Bot. Tidskr. 86 (3): 219- 226. NORÉN, M., HULTGREN, B., NITARE, J. & BERGENGREN, I. 1995: Instruktion för Datainsamling vid inventering av nyckelbiotoper. [Instruction for the Woodland Key Habitat Inventory in Sweden.] National Board of Forestry, Sweden. OLDHAMMER, B. 1994: Brandhistorik från mellersta och nordvästra Dalarna. [Forest fire history in the middle and northwestern part of the province Dalarna, Sweden.] Svensk Bot. Tidskr. 88: 259-266. Lund. OLOFSSON, D. (ed.) 1996: Tickor i Sverige - Projektrapport 1996. [Polypores in Sweden. 1996.] Norrköping. PAAL, J. 1997: Eesti taimkatte kasvukohatüüpide klassifikatsioon [Classification of Estonian vegetation site types.]. Eesti Keskkonnaministerium ja ÜRO Keskkonnaprogramm, Tallinn. PAAL, J. 1998: Skyddsvärda växtsamhällen i Estland. [Plant communities meriting protection in Estonia.] Svensk Bot. Tidskr. 92: 163-183. Lund. PAAL, J. 1998: Rare and threatened plant communities of Estonia. – Biodiveristy and Conservation 7:1027-1049. PALM, T. 1959: Die Holz- und Rinden-Käfer der Sud- und Mittelschwedishen Laubbäume. Opusc. Ent. Suppl. XVI. PALO, A. & KÜLVIK, M. 1997: Metsa võtmebiotoobid. Lühitutvustus. Arutelu variant. Lõuna- Eesti Keskkonnakaitse Instituut, Tartu, 26 pp + 11 pp app. /Käsikiri. Eesti Metsanduse Arenguprogrammi tellimus/ PALO, A. & KÜLVIK, M. 1998: Forest key biotopes. Short introduction. Discussion document. Environmental Protection Institute, Tartu, 18 pp. /Manuscript. Order of National Forestry Board of Estonia / PARMASTO, E. & PARMASTO, I. 1997: Lignicolous Aphyllophorales of old and primevil forests in Estonia. 1. The forests of northern Central estonia with a preliminary list of indicator species. Folio Cryptog. Estonica, Fasc. 31: 38-45. PAWŁOWSKA, E. & POKRYSZKO, B. M. 1998: Why are terrestrial gastropods of Poland threatened? – Folia malacologica, 6(1-4): 63–73. PETTERSSON, B. & FISKESJÖ, A-L. 1992: Lövnaturskogens flora och fauna – värdering, urval och skötsel av bestånd. [Flora and Fauna in semi-natural deciduous forests – conservation evaluation, selection and management of stands.] Swedish Environmental Protection Agency. Report 3991. Solna. PRIEDÎTIS, N. 1993a: Black alder swamps on forested peatlands in Latvia. Folia Geobot. Phytotax., Praha, 28:261-277. PRIEDÎTIS, N. 1993b: Latvijas purvainie meþi un to aizsardzîba [Swamp forests of Latvia: status and conservation]. Rîga.- 74 lpp. PRIEDÎTIS, N. 1993c: Pine-birch forest communities on nondrained peatlands in Latvia./ Feddes Repertorium 104, 3-4, 271-281. PRIEDÎTIS, N. 1993e: Spruce forests (ass. Sphagno girgensohnii-Piceeteum (Br.-Bl. 39) Polak. 62) on excessively moistened peatlands in Latvia./ Acta Soc. Bot. Poloniae 62: 199-202.
- 70 - PRIEDÎTIS, N. 1997a: Alnus glutinosa-dominated wetland forests of the Baltic region: community structure, syntaxonomy and conservation./ Plant Ecology 129: 49-94. PRIEDÎTIS, N. 1997b: Vegetation of wetland forests in Latvia: A synopsis./ Ann. Bot. Fennici, Helsinki, 34: 91-108. PULLIAM, R. 1988: Sources, sinks and population regulation. American Naturalist 132: 652- 661. RANDLANE, T. 1998: Red list of Estonian macrolichens. Folia Cryptog. Estonica, Fasc. 32: 75-79. RANDLANE, T. & SAAG, A. (eds.) 1999: Second checklist of lichenized, lichenicolous and allied fungi of Estonia. – Folia Cryptogamica Estonica. Fasc 35. Red Data Book of the Baltic Region, 1993.- Part 1.- Lists of threatened vascular plants and vertebrates. - Uppsala: Swedish threatened species unit.- 95 pp. Red Data Book of European bryophythes 1995.- European Committee for Conservation of Bryophytes.- Trondheim.- 291 pp. RENVALL P. 1995: Community structure and dynamics of wood-rotting Basidiomycetes on decomposing conifer trunks in northern Finland. Karstenia. 35: 1-51. ROSE, F. 1976: Lichenological indicators of age and environmental continuity in woodlands. In Lichenology: Progress and Problems (D.H. BROWN, D.L. HAWKSWORTH and R.H. BAILEY eds.) pp. 279-307. London and New York: Academic Press. RUDZITE M., PILATE D. & PARELE E. 1997: Molluskenfauna Lettlands. – Mitt. Dtsch. Malakozool. Ges., 59: 1–10. RUNDLÖF, U. & NILSSON, S.G. 1995: Fem Ess metoden. Spåra skydsvärd skog i södra Sverige. [Trace forests valuable for nature protection in southern Sweden.] Helsingborg. RYDBERG, H. 1997: Knappnålslavar på gamla ekar i Södermanland – status och naturvårdsåtgärder. [Caliciales lichens on old oaks in Södermanland, Sweden,] Svensk Bot. tidskr. 91: 39-57. Lund. RYMAN, S-G. & HOLMÅSEN, I., 1992: Svampar-en fälthandbok. [Fungi. A field guide.] RYVARDEN, L. & GILBERTSON, R.L. 1993, 1994. European Polypores. Parts 1,2. Fungiflora. Olso. 1-774. RÅBERG, S., FORSLUND, M., KNUTSSON, T. & LANGE, C. 1998: Inventering av hässlen på Ölands mittland. [Inventory of hazel groves on Ölands mittland.] County Board of Kalmar. Meddelande 1998:8. RUTKAUSKAS, A. 2000: Taksacinės kortelės pildymo instrukcija. – Kaunas. SAMUELSSON, J., GUSTAFSSON, L. & INGELÖG, T. 1994: Dying and dead trees- a review of their importance for biodiversity. SEPA Report 4306. SANTESSON, R. 1993: The lichens and lichenicolous fungi of Sweden and Norway. Lund. SJÖRS, H. 1965: Forest regions. Acta Phytogeogr. Suecica 50: 48-53. SMITH, A.J.E. 1990: The moss flora of Britain and Ireland.- Cambridge.- 706 pp. SMITH, A.J.E. 1991: The liverworts of Britain and Ireland.- Cambridge.- 362 pp. SSYMANK, A. 1994: Indikatorarten der fauna für historisch alte Wälder. NNA- Berichte 7 (3): 134- 141. Strategy for natural forests and other types of high conservation value in Denmark, 1994. Ministry of the Environment, the National Forest and Nature Agency. SUNHEDE, S. & VASILIAUSKAS, R. 1996: Wood and bark inhabiting fungi on oak in Lithuania//Baltic Forestry.- Kaunas.- Vol. 2, No. 2.- 23.- 27. lpp. SUÐKO U. 1997: Bioloìiskajai daudzveidîbai nozîmîgi dabisko meþu fragmenti Augðdaugavâ un ieskats to sûnaugu un vaskulâro augu indikatorsugu bagâtîbâ./ Daba un Muzejs, 7. laid.- Rîga, 27.- 32. lpp. SUÐKO U. 1998: Latvijas dabiskie meþi. Pçtîjums par bioloìiskâs daudzveidîbas struktûrâm, atkarîgajâm sugâm un meþa vçsturi. WWF- Pasaules Dabas fonds.- Rîga.- 186 lpp.s
- 71 - SYDA, I. & MILÄNDER, G. 1998: Eesti putukate levikuatlas, 1. Siklased, kaardid 1-97. [Distribution Maps of Estonian Insects, 1. Cerambycidae, maps 1-97. Tartu. SÖDERSTRÖM, L. 1988: Sequence of bryophytes and lichens in relation to substrate variables of decaying coniferous wood in Northern Sweden.- Nord.J.Bot. 8:89-97. Copenhagen. SÖDERSTRÖM L. & JONSSON, B .G. 1992: Naturskogarnas fragmentering och mossor på temporära substrat. [Fragmentation of old-growth forests and bryophytes on temporary substrates]. Svensk Bot. Tidskr. 86: 185- 198. Lund. TIBELL, L. 1992: Crustose lichens as indicators of forest continuity in boreal coniferous forests. Nord. J. Bot. 12: 427-450. ŠIVICKIS, P. 1960: Lietuvos moliuskai ir jų apibūdinimas. – Vilnius. THOR, G. 1998: Red-listed lichens in Sweden: habitats, threats, protection, and indicator value in boreal coniferous forests. Biod. and Cons. 7: 59-72. TRASS, H. & RANDLANE, T. (eds.) 1994: Eesti Suursamblikud. [Macrolichens od Estonia.] Tartu Ülikooli Botaanika ja ökoloogia instituudis, Tartu. URBONAS, V. 1997: Kempiniečiai (Polyporales), žvynabaravykiečiai (Strobilomycetales), baravykiečiai (Boletales), guoteniečiai (Hygrophorales). – In: MINKEVIČIUS A., URBONAS V. (ed.), Lietuvos grybai, 8(1). – Vilnius. VIILMA, K., ÖÖVEL, J., TAMM, U., TOMSON, P., AMOS, T., OSTONEN, I., SØRENSEN, P. & KUUBA, R. 2001: Estonian Forest Conservation Area Network. Final Report of the Estonian Forest Conservation Area Network Project. – Triip Grupp, Tartu. 95 p + 306 p. WALDÉN, H.W. 1998: Studier över skogsbruksåtgärdernas inverkan på snäckfaunans biodiversitet. [Studies on the impact by forestry on the mollusc fauna in commercially used forests in Central Sweden.] National Board of Forestry, Report 2, 1998. Jönköping. WIKARS, L-O. 1992: Skogsbränder och insekter. [Forest fires and insects.] Ent. Tidskr. 113(4): 1-11. WIRTH, V, 1995: Die Flechten Baden-Wurttembergs. Stuttgart. WÅGSTRÖM, K. 1998: Marksvampar i kalkbarrskogar och skogsbeten i Gotländska nyckelbiotoper. [Ground-living fungi in calcareous coniferous forests and grazed forest in Woodland Key Habitats on Gotland.] National Board of Forestry, report 7, 1998. Jönköping. WWF project 4568: Conservation plan for Latvia, 1992. Riga (in Latvian). ZACHARIAS, D. & BRANDES, D. 1990: Species area-relationships and frequency- floristical data analyses of 44 isolated woods in northwestern Germany. Vegetatio 88: 21-29. ZACKRISSON, O & ÖSTLUND, L. 1991: Branden formade skogslandskapets mosaik. [The mosaic of the forest landscape was formed by forest fires.] Skog och forskning 4: 13-21.
- 72 - ANNEX 1. FIELDSHEET
Forest enterprise Forest enterprise Protected territory Plot Subplot Whole Plot Subplot Whole subplot subplot
Date
Fieldworker
WKH No. Ortophoto map No. GPS coordinates Source data N E
3a. WKH type 3b.Concurrent WKH(PWKH) type 3c. PWKH type
4. Landscape Key Elements
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Steep bank of river Steep bank of Steep bank of Steep lakeshore Steep water- Steep seashore Steep pondshore stream ditch reservoir bank 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Flat shore of water- Flat riverbank Flat streambank Flat ditchbank Flat lakeshore Flat seashore Flat shore of pond reservoir 31 32 33 34 35 36 Temporarily Intermittent stream Marginal water Karst formation Non-intermittent flooded area outlet of raised Falls pond bog 41 42 43 44 45 46 Island (<3ha) in Island (<3ha) in Island (<3ha) in Island (<3ha) in Island (<3ha) in Island (<3ha) in minerotrophic lake river mixotropic swamp bog reed swamp 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 Steep bluff (>15°) Single spring Springs Springy area Gully Ravine Rill 61 62 63 64 65 66 Forest edge with Forest edge with Forest edge Forest edge with Forest edge with Beach ridges field meadow with pasture wetland other forest 71 72 73 74 75 Heap of stones Sands Dune Boulder Stonefield 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 Stone fence Ruins Open bog Open swamp Open grassland Burial ground Mound
5. Biological Key Elements
11 12 13 14 15 16 Stand with uneven Laying deadwood of Laying deadwood of Stand with trees of Many wood ihabiting Many pendulous density and structure few stages of many stages of varying age fungi/conks lichens (gaps) decomposition decomposition I storey 21 22 23 24 25 26 Four different Many old hasel Three essential Signs of beaver species of broad- Forest fire signs Large nest bushes tree/bushes species activity leaved trees
- 73 - Key Elements frequency (1; 2; 3)
Trees with holes and Fallen trees with bark Fallen trees without Natural snags (d>15 Well developed stools hollow trees (d>25 cm) bark (d>25 cm) cm) Sp.Fr.Sp.Fr.Sp.Fr.Sp.Fr.Sp.Fr.
Standing biologically old trees (1; 2; 3)
alive dead Small, slowly With origin in Small, slowly With origin in Normal size Sun-exposed Normal size Sun-exposed grown open position grown open position Sp. Fr. Sp. Fr. Sp. Fr. Sp. Fr. Sp. Fr. Sp. Fr. Sp. Fr. Sp. Fr.
6. Indictor species and habitat specialists (1; 2; 3; 9)
Species abbreviation Fr.. Species abbreviation Fr.. NECK PEN 1
7. Negative disturbances (1; 2)
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Still No longer Clear Ruts of working working Recent Power/telephone Deterioation felling in forestry Road Railway Dam Waste Pollution Other drenage drenage management line from visitors vicinity machine system system
8. Best management for the biodiversity values Solitary trees in need of clearing Species Species 11 12 13 14 15 16 Cut young No removal of dying Cut bush layer No management Shelter zone No drainage trees trees or woody debris (% of ground) (%ground)
Large nest Cut spruce Nest Plot Tree Bird species % of area Cutting rate % Number of cutting stages Subplot layer No. species (if known) I II understorey
- 74 - 9. Remarks
The most distinguishing WKH characteristics: 1. Very old thick living or dead trees (oak, ash, etc.); ~50 % of stand volume cosist of biologically old trees; abundant large CWD, many habitat specielists or indicators (underline), other values: ______2. Tree species harbouring habitat specialists and indicator species: ______3. Landscape elements connected to the indicator and habitat specialist species (site characteristics): ______Other remarks: ______
- 75 - Annex 2. Indicator species and habitat specialists LICHENS
Indicator species
Latin name Acronyme Lithuanian name Acrocordia gemmata ACRO GEM Baltoji akrokordija Arthonia byssacea ARTH BYS Pelėsinė artonija Bacidia polychroa BACI POL Daugiaspalvė bacidija Bacidia rubella BACI RUB Gelsvoji bacidija Chaenotheca phaeocephala CHAE PHA Rudagalvė žiovenė Chrysothrix candelaris CHRY CAN Kandeliarinė auksuotė Chrysothrix flavovirens CHRY FLA Geltonžalė auksuotė Chrysothrix spp. CHRY SPP Auksuotė Fellhanera spp. FELL SPP Felhanera Haematomma ochroleucum HAEM OCH Gelsvažalė hematoma Hypogymnia farinacea HYPO FAR Miltuotasis plynkežis Pertusaria coccodes PERT COC Raudonuojančioji spuoguotė Phlyctis agelaea PHLY AGE Ąžuolinė spuogė Pleurosticta acetabulum PLEU ACE Taurinis platkežis Porina aenea PORI AEN Variaspalvė porina Pyrenula nitidella PYRE NID Smulkioji raupuotė Sclerophora nivea SCLE NIV Šerkšnotoji brylytė Xylographa parallela XYLG PAR Eglinė medbrėža
Habitat specialists
Latin name Acronyme Lithuanian name Acrocordia cavata ACRO CAV Mažoji akrokordija Arthonia leucopellea ARTH LEU Baltakraštė artonija Arthonia vinosa ARTH VIN Vyninė artonija Bacidia rosella BACI ROS Rožinė bacidija Biatora sphaeroides BIAT SHP Apvalioji biatora Biatoridium monasteriensis BIAD MON Smulkusis biatoridis Bryoria nadvornikiana BRYO NAD Nadvorniko lamagaurė Buellia alboatra BUEL ALB Margoji buelija Calicium adspersum CALI ADS Calicium quercinum CALI QUE Ąžuolinė taurenė Cetrelia olivetorum CETR OLI Žalsvoji kežytė Chaenotheca brachypoda CHAE BRA Šakotoji žiovenė Chaenotheca chlorella CHAE CHL Žalsvoji žiovenė Chaenotheca cinerea CHAE CIN Melsvoji žiovenė Chaenotheca gracillima* CHAE GRA Chaenotheca hispidula CHAE HIS Šeriuotoji žiovenė Cladonia parasitica CLAD PAR Parazitinė šiurė Cliostomum corrugatum* CLIO COR Collema flaccidum COLL FLA Glebioji gleiviakerpė Collema nigrescens COLL NIG Juosvoji gleiviakerpė Cybybe gracilenta* CYBY GRA Evernia divaricata EVER DIV Skėtrioji briedragė
- 76 - Evernia mesomorpha EVER MES Kintančioji briedragė Flavoparmelia caperata FLVP CAP Raukšlėtasis geltonkežis
Latin name Acronyme Lithuanian name Gyalecta truncigena GYAL TRU Kamieninė gialekta Gyalecta ulmi* GYAL ULM Hypogymnia vittata HYPO VIT Juostinis plynkežis Hypotrachyna revoluta HYPT REV Alksninė hipotrachina Icmadophila ericetorum ICMA ERI Šilinė puvėseklė Lecanactis abietina LECN ABI Eglinis lekanaktis Lecanora impudens* LECA IMP Lecidea botryosa LECI BOT Leptogium saturninum LEPT SAT Gauruotasis gleivytis Lobaria pulmonaria LOBA PUL Plačioji platužė Meneqazzia terebrata MENE TER Skylėtoji menegacija Nephroma resupinatum NEPH RES Užlinkusioji nefroma Opegrapha sorediifera OPEG SOR Sorediškoji balsiūnė Opegrapha vermicellifera* OPEG VER Opegrapha viridis* OPEG VIR Pannaria leucophaea PANN LEU Smulkiažvynė skutkerpė Peltigera horizontalis PELT HOR Gulsčioji meškapėdė Pertusaria hemisphaerica PERT HEM Pusapskritė spuoguotė Pertusaria pertusa PERT PER Skylėtoji spuoguotė Phaeophyscia endophoenicea PHAP END Raudonvidurė žiauberė Punctelia subrudecta PUNC SUB Standusis taškuotkežis Pyrenula nitida PYRE NIT Blizgančioji raupuotė Ramalina baltica RAMA BAL Baltijinė ramalina Ramalina thrausta RAMA THR Plonašakė ramalina Schismatomma pericleum* SCHM PER Sclerophora spp. SCLE SPP Brylytė Thelotrema lepadinum THEL LEP Dantytoji telotrema Usnea florida USNE FLO Vislioji kedenė Usnea scabrata USNE SCA Šiurkščioji kedenė * = not found in Lithuania yet
- 77 - FUNGI
Indicator species
Latin name Acronyme Lithuanian name Boletus spp. (except B. edulis) BOLE SPP Baravykas Cantharellus lutescens CANT LUT Gelsvoji voveraitė Clavaria spp. CLAV SPP Žagarūnas Clavicorona pyxidata CLAC PYX Taurinis žvakidėlis Climacocystis borealis CLIM BOR Šiaurinis klimokas Diplomitoporus flavescens DIPL FLA Gelsvasis žievenukas Geastrum spp. GEAS SPP Žvaigždinas Geoglossum spp., Microglossum spp. GEOG SPP Gloeophyllum abietinum GLOH ABI Eglinis tinklūnas Gloeoporus dichrous GLOE DIC Dvispalvis gleiviaporis Gloeoporus taxicola GLOE TAX Hydnellum spp. HYDN SPP Dyglutėlis Inonotus rheades INON RHE Rudasis skylenis Ischnoderma benzoinum ISCH BEN Sakingoji tamsiatramė Junghuhnia nitida JUNH NIT Tikroji šeriapintė Lepiota spp. LEPI SPP Žvynabudėlė Limacella spp. LIMA SPP Slidabudė Lycoperdon echinatum LYCO ECH Dygliuotasis pumpotaukšlis Marasmius wynnei MARA WYN Vynėjaus mažūnis Morchella spp. MORC SPP Briedžiukas Mycena pelianthina MYCE PEL Tamsiakraštė šalmabudė Otidea spp. OTID SPP Kiškiaausis Oxyporus corticola OXYP COR Žievinė klevakempė Peziza succosa PEZI SUC Sultingasis ausūnis Phellinus chrysoloma PHEN CHR Eglinė kempinė Phellinus pini PHEN PIN Pušinė kempinė Phellodon spp. PHED SPP Tampriadyglis Polyporus badius POLY BAD Kaštoninė skylėtbudė Ramaria spp.* RAMR SPP Šakočius Sarcodon spp. (except S. imbricatum) SARC SPP Žvynadyglis Skeletocutis nivea SKEL NIV Smulkiaporė ragapintė Spatularia flavida SPAT FLA Tricholoma apium TRIH API Salierinis baltikas Tricholoma colossum TRIH COL Stambusis baltikas Tricholoma columbetta TRIH CUL Tikrasis baltikas
* see Species descriptor
Habitat specialists
Latin name Acronyme Lithuanian name Abortiporus biennis ABOR BIE Dvisluoksnis vingiaporis Agaricus augustus AGAR AUG Gelsvasis pievagrybis Albatrellus confluens ALBT CON Suaugtinė dirvapintė Aleurodiscus cerrusatus ALER CER Gelsvasis kriaukliagrybis Antrodia lenis ANTR LEN Aksomine antrodija Aurantioporus croceus AURA CRO Geltonasis auksaporis Aurantioporus fissilis AURA FIS Pleišetasis auksaporis Boletopsis leucomelaena BOLE LEU Žvynuotoji baravykpintė
- 78 - Latin name Acronyme Lithuanian name Boletus aereus BOLE AER Bronzinis baravykas Boletus erythropus BOLE ERY Dėmėtasis baravykas Boletus fechtneri BOLE FEC Fechtnerio baravykas Boletus impolitus BOLE IMP Blyškusis baravykas Boletus pulverulentus BOLE PUL Kislusis baravykas Boletus radicans BOLE RAD Kartusis baravykas Caloscypha fulgens CALO FUL Ryškioji gražiataurė Cantharellus cinereus CANT CIN Pilkoji voveraitė Ceriporia excelsa CERI EXC Puikioji vaškapintė Ceriporia purpurea CERI PUR Purpurinė vaškapintė Ceriporia reticulata CERI RET Tinkliškoji vaškapintė Ceriporiopsis aneirina CERP ANE Didžiasporė vaškapintė Choiromyces venosus CHOI VEN Baltasis godūnas Clavariadelphus pistillaris CLAR PIS Piestinis pirštūnis Clavariadelphus truncatus CLAR TRU Bukagalvis pirštūnis Dentipellis fragilis DENT FRA Trapusis dantkotis Fistulina hepatica FIST HEP Ąžuolinė kepena Fomitopsis rosea FOMI ROS Rausvoji pintainė Ganoderma lucidum GANO LUC Tikrinis blizgutis Gomphus clavatus GOMP CLA Didysis kuokas Grifola frondosa GRIF FRO Kuokštinė grifolė Gymnopilus spectabilis GYMN SPE Stambioji karčiabudė Hapalopilus salmonicolor HAPA SAL Auksaspalvis minkštenis Hemipholiota albocrenulata HEMI ALB Hericium coralloides HERI COR Korališkasis trapiadyglis Hygrophorus atramentosus HYGR ATR Juosvoji guotė Hygrophorus camarophyllus HYGR CAM Juosvarudė guotė Hygrophorus chrysodon HYGR CHR Geltonžvynė guotė Hygrophorus erubescens HYGR ERU Purpurinė guotė Hygrophorus penarius HYGR PEN Kietoji guotė Hygrophorus russula HYGR RUS Ūmėdinė guotė Inonotus dryadeus INON DRY Kamštinis skylenis Inonotus dryophilus INON DRU Ąžuolinis skylenis Irpicodon pendulus IRPI PEN Junghuhnia collabens JUNH COL Rausvoji šeriapintė Kavinia himantia KAVI HIM Juostinė kavinija Lactarius acerrimus LACT ACE Aitriakvapis piengrybis Lactarius lignyotus LACT LIG Juodasis piengrybis Lactarius scrobiculatus LACT SCR Geltonasis piengrybis Lactarius volemus LACT VOL Piengrybis jautakis Lentaria soluta LENA SOL Atskiroji lentarija Lentinus ursinus LENT URS Meškinis dantūnėlis Lentinus vulpinus LENT VUL Lapinis dantūnėlis Lepiota grangei LEPI GRA Žaliažvynė žvynabudėlė Leptoporus mollis LEPP MOL Minkštoji sunkiapintė Lycoperdon pedicellatum LYCO PED Kotuotasis pumpotaukšlis Melanophyllum echinatum MELA ECH Raudonlakštis kelmenis Melanophyllum eyrei MELA EYR Žalialakštis kelmenis Morchella elata MORC ELA Aukštasis briedžiukas Morchella semilibera MORC SEM Puslaisvis briedžiukas Mutinus caninus MUTI CAN Šuniškoji poniabudėlė Onnia tomentosa ONNI TOM Vilnotoji pintele Otidea onotica OTID ONO Geltonasis kiškiaausis
- 79 - Latin name Acronyme Lithuanian name Panus suavissimus PANU SUA Kvapusis skiautenis Perenniporia medulla-panis PERE MED Vientisasis skylutis Phaeolus schweinitzii PHAL SCH Šveinico rudapintė Phellinus ferrugineofuscus PHEL FEF Kaštoninė kempinė Phellinus ferruginosus PHEL FEG Rudėtoji kempinė Phellinus nigrolimitatus PHEL NIG Tamsiarudė kempinė Phlebia centrifuga PHLE CEN Physisporinus sanguinolentus PHYS SAN Raustančioji minkštapintė Physisporinus vitreus PHYS VIT Švytruojančioji minkštapintė Pleurocybella porrigens PLEC POR Kriaukliškoji baltė Polyporus umbellatus POLY UMB Šakotasis sėdis Porphyrellus porphyrosporus PORP POR Tikrasis juodbaravykis Pseudocraterellus sinuosus PSEU SIN Raukšlėtasis trimitėlis Pseudomerulius aureus PSEM AUR Auksuotasis lapielaižis Punctularia strigozonata PUNL STR Šeriuotasis raukšliagrybis Pycnoporellus fulgens PYCL FUL Skaisčioji raudonpintelė Pycnoporus cinnabarinus PYCR CIN Tikroji raudonpintė Rhodotus palmatus RHOD PAL Gyslotoji kremzliabudė Russula aurata RUSS AUR Auksaviršė ūmėdė Sarcosoma globosum SARS GLO Paprastasis taukius Serpula himantioides SERP HIM Plėvelinis trobagrybis Skeletocutis stellae SKEL STE Stelo ragapintė Sparassis crispa SPAR CRI Kopūstgalvis raukšlius Spongipellis spumeus SPON SPU Putlioji odapintė Steccherinum laeticolor STEC LAE Ryškiaspalvis laibadyglis Stropharia albocrenulata STRO ALB Karpiniuotoji gleiviabude Trametes gibbosa TRAM GIB Karpotoji kempė Trametes suaveolens TRAM SUA Kvapnioji kempė Tricholomopis decora TRIL DEC Gelsvasis baltikenis Tubaria confragosa TUBA CON Žieduotoji šakabudė Tyromyces placenta TYRO PLA Raustancioji baltapinte Urnula craterium URNU CRA Krateriškasis taurūnis Verpa bohemica VERP BOH Bohemiškasis aukšliavarpis Verpa conica VERP CON Pirštuotasis aukšliavarpis Xylaria polymorpha XYLA POL Kislusis elniagrybis Xylobolus frustulatus XYLO FRU Kurapkinis storplutis
- 80 - VASCULAR PLANTS
Indicator species
Latin name Acronyme Lithuanian name Allium ursinum ALLI URS Meškinis česnakas Anthericum ramosum* ANTH RAM Šakotasis šiaudenis Arnica montana* ARNI MON Kalninė arnika Bromopsis spp. BROM SPP Dirsuolė Cardamine bulbifera CARD BUL Svogūninė dantažolė Cephalanthera rubra* CEPH RUB Raudonasis garbenis Corallorhiza trifida CORA TRI Nariuotoji ilgalūpė Corydalis cava CORY CAV Tuščiaviduris rūtenis Corydalis intermedia CORY INT Tarpinis rūtenis Cypripedium calceolus CYPR CAL Plačialapė klumpaitė Diphasiastrum complanatum DIPH COM Dvišakė padraika Diphasiastrum tristachyum* DIPH TRI Trivarpė padraika Dryopteris cristata DRYO CRI Skiauterinis papartis Epipactis helleborine EPIA HEL Plačialapis skiautalūpis Festuca altissima FEST ALT Miškinis eraičinas Hordelymus europaeus HORD EUR Europinis miežvienis Huperzia selago HUPE SEL Statusis atgiris Hypericum montanum* HYPE MON Kalninė jonažolė Isopyrum thalictroides ISOP THA Trilapė bligna Lathyrus laevigatus LATH LAE Geltonžiedis pelėžirnis Linnaea borealis LINN BOR Šiaurinė linėja Lunaria rediviva LUNA RED Daugiametė blizgė Matteuccia struthiopteris MATT STR Paupinis jonpapartis Melittis melissophyllum* MELI MEL Melisalapė medumėlė Moneses uniflora MONE UNI Vienažiedė žemoklė Poa remota POA* REM Retažiedė miglė Polypodium vulgare POLP VUL Paprastoji šertvė Vicia dumetorum VICI DUM Krūmelinis vikis Vicia pisiformis VICI PIS Žirnialapis vikis * – edge species
Habitat specielists
Latin name Acronyme Lithuanian name Epipogium aphyllum EPIP APH Belapė antbarzdė Galium triflorum GALI TRI Trižiedis lipikas Glyceria lithuanica GLYC LIT Lietuvinė monažolė Hedera helix HEDE HEL Gebenė lipikė Listera cordata LIST COR Širdinė dviguonė Neottianthe cucullata NEOT CUC Miškinė plikaplaiskė Polystichum aculeatum POLS ACU Miškinis spyglainis
- 81 - BRYOPHYTES
Indicator species
Latin name Acronyme Lithuanian name Anomodon attenuatus ANOM ATT Smulkioji kreivadantė Anomodon longifolius ANOM LON Ilgalapė kreivadantė Anomodon viticulosus ANOM VIT Vytelinė kreivadantė Aulacomnium androgynum AULA AND Kelminė tranšė Frullania dilatata FRUL DIL Dėmėtoji frulanija Helodium blandowii HELO BLA Plunksninė žvaizdara Isothecium alopecuroides ISOT ALO Pašiauštoji uodegė Jamesoniella autumnalis JAME AUT Rudeninė kryžmelė Jungermannia leiantha JUNG LEI Lancetinė tiesmė Lejeunea cavifolia LEJE CAV Įgaubtoji plojenė Leucobryum glaucum LEUC GLA Melsvoji balzganė Lophozia incisa LOPH INC Įkirptalapė skiautenė Lophozia longidens LOPH LON Ilgaskiautė skiautenė Lophozia spp. LOPH SPP Skiautenė Metzgeria furcata METZ FUR Dvišakė skirstė Neckera complanata NECK COM Plokščioji pliusnė Nowellia curvifolia NOWE CUR Riestalapė raguotė Palustriella commutata PALU COM Kaičioji pelkmė Paraleucobryum longifolium PARA LON Ilgalapė sukutė Philonotis spp. PHIL SPP Versmenė Porella spp. PORE SPP Plikūnė Pseudobryum cinclidioides PSEB CIN Liekninis silnyčius Riccardia latifrons RICC LAT Plačiaskiautė rikardija Riccardia palmata RICC PAL Pirštuotoji rikardija Splachnum ampullaceum SPLA AMP Paputžandis mėšlius Tortella tortuosa TORT TOR Garbanotoji linkė Ulota crispa ULOT CRI Tikroji garbuonė
Habitat specialists
Latin name Acronyme Lithuanian name Anastrophyllum hellerianum ANAS HEL Helerio pilelė Antitrichia curtipendula ANTI CUR Karoklinė skliautenė Barbilophozia attenuata BARB ATT Lieknoji barzdenė Barbilophozia barbata BARB BAR Keturskiautė barzdenė Bazzania trilobata BAZZ TRI Tridantė bazanija Callicladium haldanianum CALL HAL Šliaužiančioji rumbainė Calypogeia suecica CALY SUE Švedinė traunė Ctenidium molluscum CTEN MOL Riestasis ktenidis Dicranodontium denudatum DICD DEN Dantytoji trupsamanė Dicranum drummondii DICR DRU Raukšlėtoji dvyndantė Dicranum spurium DICR SPU Garbanotoji dvyndantė Dicranum viride DICR VIR Žalioji dvyndantė Frullania tamarisci FRUL TAM Tįsioji frulanija Geocalyx graveolens GEOC GRA Kvapioji žemtaurė Neckera crispa NECK CRI Garbanotoji pliusnė Odontoschisma denudatum ODON DEN Plikoji raistūnė Neckera pennata NECK PEN Plunksninė pliusnė Plagiothecium latebricola PLAG LAT Smulkioji pažulnutė Plagiothecium undulatum PLAG UND Vingialapė pažulnutė
- 82 - Rhynchostegium murale RHYN MUR Uolinė ežerė Rhytidiadelphus loreus RHYT LOR Šikšninė kerėža
Latin name Acronyme Lithuanian name Scapania apiculata SCAP API Mažoji skapanija Scapania undulata SCAP UND Banguotoji skapanija Schistostega pennata SCHI PEN Pluksninė švitrelė Sphagnum wulfianum SPHA WUL Vulfo kiminas Tayloria tenuis TAYL TEN Lieknoji teilorija Trichocolea tomentella TRIC TOM Pūkuotoji apuokė Tritomaria quinquedentata TRIT QUI Įkirptoji tritomarija
- 83 - INSECTS
Indicator species
Latin name Acronyme Acanthoderes clavipes ACAN CLA Ampedus nigroflavus AMPE NIG Ampedus sanguineus AMPE SAN Callidium coriaceum CALD COR Dendrophagus crenatus DENP CRE Liocola marmorata LIOC MAR Melandrya dubia MELA DUB Mycetochara spp. MCTC SPP Mycetophagus quadripustulatus MCTP QUA Necydalis major NECY MAJ Ostoma ferruginea OSTM FER Peltis grossa PELT GRO Platycerus spp. PLCR SPP Saperda perforata SPRD PER Xylotrechus rusticus XLTR RUS
Habitat specialists
Latin name Acronyme Acmaeops marginata ACPS MAR Acmaeops septentrionis ACPS SEP Agrilus ater AGRL ATE Agrilus mendax AGRL MEN Ampedus cinnabarinus AMPE CIN Ampedus elongatulus AMPE ELO Anaesthetis testacea ANST TES Anaglyptus mysticus ANGL MYS Anoplodera variicornis ANPL VAR Arhopalus tristis ARHP TRI Bius thoracius BIUS THO Boros schneideri BORO SCH Buprestis novemmaculata BUPR NOV Calitys scabra CALT SCA Calosoma inquisitor CLSM INQ Calosoma sycophanta CLSM SYC Carphoborus cholodovskyi CRCH CHO Ceruchus chrysomelinus CERH CHR Chalcophora mariana CHCP MAR Cyrtoclytus capra CRCL CAP Corticeus unicolor CRTC UNI Cossonus cylindricus COSS CYL Cossonus parallelepipedus COSS PAR Cucujus cinnaberinus CUCU CIN Cucujus haematodes CUCU HAE Dendroxena quadrimaculata DEXN QUA Denticollis borealis DECL BOR Denticollis rubens DECL RUB Descarpentriesina variolosa DSTR VAR Dicerca alni DCRC ALN Dicerca furcata DCRC FUR Dircaea quadriguttata DIRC QUA Drapetes mordelloides DRAP MOR
- 84 - Latin name Acronyme Eustrophus dermestoides EUST DER Gnorimus nobilis GNOR NOB Gonodera luperus GNDR LUP Grammoptera erythropus ingrica GRPT ERY Hedobia imperialis HDOB IMP Hylastes attenuatus HLST ATTE Hypulus bifasciatus HYPL BIF Hypulus quercinus HYPL QUE Hololepta plana HOLO PLA Isorhipis marmottani ISRP MAR Leiopus punctulatus LCRP PUN Leptura nigripes LPTR NIG Leptura thoracica LPTR THOR Lymexylon navale LMXL NAV Lucanus cervus LUCA CER Melanophila acuminata MPHL ACU Neatus picipes NEAT PIC Nothorhina punctata NTHR PUN Oplocephala haemorrhoidalis OCPL HAE Orthotomicus longicollis ORTT LON Osmoderma eremita OSMD ERE Pelecotoma fennica PLCT FEN Pentaphyllus testaceus PENT TES Phytobaenus amabilis PHTB AMA Phryganophilus auritus PRGP AUR Pityophthorus morosovi PITP MOR Pityophthorus tragardhi PIT TRA Plagionotus detritus PLNT DET Platydema violaceum PLTD VIO Platyrhinus resinosus PLRN RES Poecilium alni POCL ALN Prionychus ater PRCH ATE Prionus coriarius PRIO COR Pytho abieticola PYTO ABI Rhagium bifasciatum RHAG BIF Rhamnusium bicolor RHMN BIC Salpingus aeneus SLPG AEN Scolytus multistriatus SCOL MUL Scolytus scolytus SCOL SCO Stenagostus rufus STGS RUF Tragosoma depsarium TRGS DEP Triphyllus bicolor TRPL BIC Trypophloeus alni TRPP ALN Trypophloeus asperatus TRPP ASP Trypophloeus discedens TRPP DIS Tropideres dorsalis TRPD DOR Uloma culinaris ULOM CUL Upis ceramboides UPIS CER Xestobium rufovillosum XEST RUF Xylita livida XLIT LIV Xylophilus corticalis XLPL COR Xylotrechus arvicola XLTR ARV
- 85 - MOLLUSCS Indicator species
Latin name Acronyme Lithuanian name Acannthynula aculeata ACAN ACU Clausilia bidentata* CLAU BID Clausilia cruciata CLAU CRU Clausilia dubia CLAU DUB Clausilia pumila CLAU PUM Cochlodina orthostoma COCH ORT Discus rotundatus DISC ROT Discus ruderatus DISC RUD Ena obscura ENAA OBS Lacinaria plicata LACI PLI Limax cinereoniger LIMA CIN Macrogastrata latestriata MACR LAT Macrogastra plicatula MACR PLI Macrogastra ventricosa MACR VEN Ruthenica filograna RUTH FIL * not found in Lithuania yet
Habitat specialists
Latin name Acronyme Lithuanian name Acicula polita ACIC POL Bulgarica cana BULG CAN Ena montana ENNA MON Helicigona lapicida* HELI LAP Isognomostoma isognomostoma ISOG ISO * not found in Lithuania yet
Species in bold are especially useful to know. They are emphazised in the training of the field workers.
- 86 - Annex 3. A typological classification system of the forests in Lithuania (S. Karazija, 1988)
Landšaftiniai Miško tipų serijų Augaviečių Miško tipų serijos Miško tipų Dirvožemio miško tipų grupės tipai serijos tipologinės kompleksai santrumpa grupės (M. Vaičys) Landscape forest The groups of forest Site type Forest type series Forest Soil type complexes type series type series typological groups
A. Šilai I. Sausašiliai 1. Kerpšilis Kerpinė – Cladoniosa cl Nal, Na Coniferous forest Pine forests 2. Brukniašilis Brukninė – Vacciniosa vNa, Nb
II. Eglynšiliai 3. Žaliašilis Brukninė-mėlyninė – v-m Nb Spruce – pine Vaccinio-myrtillosa forests 4. Mėlynšilis Mėlyninė – Myrtillosa mLb
B. Pelkiašiliai III. Užpelkėję šilai 5. Balašilis Mėlyninė-kimininė – m-sph Ub Bogged up pine Myrtillo-sphagnosa forests Bogged up and IV. Pelkiniai šilai 6. Raistašilis Viksvinė-kimininė – c-sph Pb boggy pine forests Boggy pine forests Carico-sphagnosa 7. Tyrašilis Gailinė-kimininė – Ledo- l-sph Pa sphagnosa C. Girios V. Eglyngiriai 8. Šilagiris Kiškiakopūstinė – ox Nc Spruce forests Oxalidosa Mixed forests 9. Mėlyngiris Mėlyninė-kiškiakopūstinė m-ox Lc Myrtillo-oxalidosa VI. Lapuotgiriai 10. Sausgiris Žibuoklinė- h-ox Nc, Nd Spruce-deciduous kiškiakopūstinė – forests Hepatico-oxalidosa 11. Žaliagiris Kiškiakopūstinė- ox-n Ld plačialapė – Oxalido- nemorosa VII. Uosgiriai 12. Baltmiškis Garšvinė – Aegopodiosa aeg Nf, Lf Deciduous forests 13. Šlapgiris Viksvinė-įvairiažolė – c-mh Ld, Lf Carico-mixtoherbosa D. Pelkiagiriai VIII. Pabaliai 14. Paraistis Lendrūninė – c-cal Uc Spruce-deciduous Calamagrostidosa forests Boggy deciduous 15. Palieknis Vingiorykštinė- fil Ud forests įvairiažolinė – Filipendulo- mixtoherbosa IX. Juodymai 16. Juodgiris Dilgėlinė – Urticosa ur Uf Black alder forests 17. Lieknas Viksvinė-vilkdalginė – c-ir Pd Carico-iridosa X. Raistai 18. Raistas Viksvinė – Caricosa cPc Birch forests
- 87 - ANNEX 4. Search criteria for WKH´s in the Forestry database
List no. 1 Species Age from: % on stand mixture (from) Pinus 120 30 Spruce 100 50 Quercus 110 10 Betula 90 50 Alnus glutinosa 70 30 Fraxinus 70 20 Tilia 70 5 Ulmus 70 5 Acer 70 5 Alnus incana 60 50 Populus 70 30
List no. 2 Species Age from: % on stand mixture (up to) Pinus 150 30 Spruce 100 50 Quercus 130 10 Betula 100 50 Alnus glutinosa 80 30 Fraxinus 80 20 Populus 100 30 Salix caprea 60 1
- 88 -