Conservation Significance of Intact Forest Landscapes in The
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Landscape Ecol (2020) 35:2113–2131 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-020-01088-4 (0123456789().,-volV)( 0123456789().,-volV) RESEARCH ARTICLE Conservation significance of intact forest landscapes in the Scandinavian Mountains Green Belt Johan Svensson . Jakub W. Bubnicki . Bengt Gunnar Jonsson . Jon Andersson . Grzegorz Mikusin´ski Received: 6 July 2019 / Accepted: 1 August 2020 / Published online: 10 August 2020 Ó The Author(s) 2020 Abstract Methods Over 22 million ha with 14.5 million ha Context As forest harvesting remains high, there is a boreal and subalpine forest and with data consisting of crucial need to assess the remaining large, contiguous a 60-70 year retrospective sequence, we analyzed and intact forests, regionally, nationally and globally. distribution, density and connectivity of forests that Objectives Our objective was to analyze the spatial have not been clear cut, using moving window and patterns and structural connectivity of intact and landscape analyzes derived from Circuitscape. primary forests in northern Sweden with focus on Results We revealed a contiguous, connected and the Scandinavian Mountain region; one of the few semi-connected intact forest landscape forming a remaining large European intact forest landscapes. distinct Green Belt south to north along the mountain range. Almost 60% of the forestland remains intact, including contiguous clusters 10,000 ha and larger. The connectivity is particularly high in protected areas Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-020-01088-4) con- with primary forests outside contributing substantially tains supplementary material, which is available to authorized to overall connectivity. We found gaps in connectivity users. J. Svensson Á B. G. Jonsson G. Mikusin´ski (&) Department of Wildlife, Fish and Environmental Studies, Department of Ecology, Grimso¨ Wildlife Research Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, SLU, Station, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 901 83 Umea˚, Sweden SLU, 730 91 Riddarhyttan, Sweden e-mail: [email protected] e-mail: [email protected] J. W. Bubnicki G. Mikusin´ski Mammal Research Institute, Polish Academy of Sciences, School for Forest Management, Swedish University of 17-230 Białowieza,_ Poland Agricultural Sciences, SLU, 739 21 Skinnskatteberg, Sweden B. G. Jonsson Department of Natural Sciences, Mid Sweden University, 851 70 Sundsvall, Sweden J. Andersson Sweco Environment AB, Umestan Fo¨retagspark Hus 12, Box 110, 901 03 Umea˚, Sweden 123 2114 Landscape Ecol (2020) 35:2113–2131 in the southern parts, and furthermore low or absent environmental targets (Sverdrup-Thygesson et al. connectivity across the whole inland and coastal areas 2014; Chazdon et al. 2016;IPBES2018; Angelstam of northern Sweden. et al. 2020). In combination with climate change, Conclusions Given its ecological values, the Scandi- intensive forestry and other drivers of ecosystem navian Mountains Green Belt is a key entity supporting change, a sledgehammer effect is foreseen where boreal ecological legacies, boreal biodiversity and ecosystem ecosystems as well as ecosystems in other biogeo- services, resilience and adaptive capacity, which needs graphic regions are at risk of entering new and to be safeguarded for the future. On the very large areas potentially irreversible ecological states (Barnosky outside the mountain region, forestlands are severely et al. 2012). Besides a need for larger areas of protected fragmented, connectivity values are lost, and forest forests (e.g., EC 2020) there is also a strong movement landscape restoration is needed for conservation and towards increasing forest cover, forest landscapes and functional green infrastructure. ecosystem restoration (Aerts and Honnay 2011), as expressed in the UN Declaration of Ecosystem Keywords Boreal Á Forest connectivity Á Green Restoration (UN 2019). Accordingly, remaining pri- infrastructure Á Landscape transformation Á Continuity mary forests, old-growth forests and intact forest forests Á Sweden landscapes needs to be identified, mapped and assessed regarding threats to and opportunities for maintaining their ecological status (Potapov et al. 2017;EC2020). The exploitation pressure in many regions remains Introduction high even in the last intact forest landscapes (e.g., Potapov et al. 2008; Chazdon et al. 2017;Mu¨ller et al. With 70% and more of the earth’s land surface 2018;EC2020). In Europe, with a long and intensive (Barnosky et al. 2012) and 80% and more of remaining land-use history, intact forest landscapes are very rare forests (Watson et al. 2018) modified by land use, the and those remaining deserve particular attention (e.g., Anthropocene human footprint immensely influences Wallenius et al. 2010). Intact forest landscapes are key ecological functions, habitat characteristics, defined as larger ([ 500 km2) mosaics of forests and ecosystem services and biodiversity (e.g., Venter natural open ecosystems that include primary forests et al. 2016;Tuckeretal.2018). Forests are subject to that show no or low influence of human activities and extensive logging worldwide that, beyond relocating habitat fragmentation, but where some historic human natural forest frontiers, also affects the functionality of influence of, e.g., preindustrial selective logging, may protected areas, remaining primary forests and intact have occurred (Potapov et al. 2008, 2017). Primary forest landscapes (Heino et al. 2015; Potapov et al. forests are defined as naturally regenerated forest with 2017; Jones et al. 2018; Sabatini et al. 2018). The native tree species where there are no clearly visible consequences of forest fragmentation and loss are signs of human influence and where the ecological increasingly debated on global scale and for many processes are not significantly disturbed (FRA 2020). It forest regions (e.g., Defries et al. 2010;Hansenetal. is also increasingly accepted that effective nature 2013;Watsonetal.2018). In the boreal biome, natural conservation will have to move beyond passive configuration of forest landscapes are seriously trans- protection of remaining high conservation value forests formed by rotation forestry systems that, amongst other into complementary active restoration of transformed impacts, interrupt spatial connectivity and temporal forest areas on both stand and landscape level through continuity of forest cover (e.g., Boucher et al. 2009; advanced conservation-oriented management strategies Svensson et al. 2018). Given the circumpolar range, and practices (e.g., Kuuluvainen 2009;Stanturfetal. large area and rich ecological values in the boreal biome 2014;Spathelfetal.2018). Hence, attention is simul- (e.g., Moen et al. 2014) this transformation profoundly taneously directed to the distinct values of primary impacts a globally important biodiversity and ecosys- forests, large, contiguous and intact forest landscapes, tem services source, disturbs ecosystem resilience to and to promoting a sustainable, holistic, multiple-scale climate and land use changes (Mantyka-Pringle et al. and multiple-use spatial landscape governance and 2012; Blumroeder et al. 2019), and contests sustain- management (Sayer 2009;Artsetal.2017; Sabatini ability- and conservation-oriented policies and et al. 2018). 123 Landscape Ecol (2020) 35:2113–2131 2115 The concept of green infrastructure, which as a critical factor (e.g., Riitters et al. 2016; Pfeifer et al. fervent EU initiative is integrated into one or more 2017). On global scale, Haddad et al. (2015) found that policy sectors in all member states (Sla¨tmo et al. 70% of the remaining primary forest areas are within 2019), aims to secure biodiversity, habitat resilience 1 km and 50% within 500 m from forest edge, and that and ecosystem services at multiple spatial scales a predominance of remaining intact forest fragments (Liquete et al. 2015). Thus, green infrastructure are only 10 ha or less in size. On national scale—for promotes landscape-scale and holistic planning based Sweden—Esseen et al. (2016) found that forest edge on known conservation core areas and their functional towards clearcuts was the most common type of edge connectivity in the existing matrix, as, for example, below the mountain region. Thus, identification, the Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative in mapping and spatial assessment of remaining intact North America (Mahr 2007) and the Australian Alps forest landscapes is critically important. In their to Atherton Connectivity Conservation Area (Pulsford global-scale analysis, Potapov et al. (2008) identified et al 2010). In practice this implies that green three intact boreal forest landscapes on the Fennoscan- infrastructure requires a spatio-temporal perspective dian shield (i.e., Norway, Sweden, Finland and ranging from local species occurrence and microsites, Northwest Russia); the forest belt on the Swedish side to habitats, landscapes and entire regions (e.g., Heller of the Scandinavian Mountain Range, the forest and Zavaleta 2009; Gustafsson et al. 2012). Further- border-area between Finland and Northwest Russia, more, a functional green infrastructure intrinsically and the Kola Peninsula forest belt. These intact forest relies on a continuum of intra- and inter-connected landscapes were also identified by Watson et al. (2018) land cover types and their transitions, temporal land- as among the last remaining wilderness areas. Of use changes, natural succession and dynamics, and these, only the Scandinavian Mountain range forest