Selectively logged forest Flashcards
Global scale comparison of primary forest sites with corresponding human-modified habitats.
- Biodiversity loss with habitat loss across all sites
- South-east asian & south American bias of samples
- Mammals more resilient, birds most vulnerable to habitat degradation/change in land use
- Different reactions of different arthropod groups
In all cases, not much data to go on – more research needed, especially in Africa
- Agriculture most detrimental land change, (than e.g. agriforestry or plantations)
- Selective logging of small areas of forest has least impact of all, but has caveats
Secondary forests are important for conservation, even though they have markedly less biodiversity than pockets of primary forest (how does this paper define ‘primary forest’? What about polish/Ukraine oldgrowth?)
Gibson et al. 2011
Protection of remaining primary forests is important, but it’s equally important to encourage land-use strategies that increase the conservation value of habitats modified by humans, as though biodiversity levels are lower in these environments, they are still ‘medium’!
Mendenhall, Stanford
Logged forests can play an important role, they are a far more biodiverse land use than agriforestry or agriculture, and even after repeated, intensive logging their level of biodiversity is roughly the same as after first cut. They store carbon and still perform important ecological roles. So though they cannot replace primary forest, they can act as important buffer zones and can maintain forest connectivity for wildlife.
Edwards & Laurence 2013
Higher vulnerability of dietary specialists to local extinction following habitat disturbance / logging
Edwards et al. 2012
Comparing bird and dung-beetle biodiversity in primary, once-logged and twice-logged forests in Sabah.
Logging had little effect on overall richness of birds
- Dung beetle richness declined after 1st logging but not after 2nd
- 75% of all species were still present in twice-logged habitat, highlighting importance of these habitats, which although less diverse than primary forest, are still better than establishing an oil plantation.
Edwards et al. 2010
Level of outcrossing between dipterocarps (in japan) in selectively logged forest was much lower, may result in inbreeding depression/decrease in genetic variation in future generations
Obayashi et al. 2002
Selective logging in bornean forest did not the species richness or abundance of butterflies, although assemblage composition is changed.
Willott et al 2000
Orangutan pop. density lower in logged forest (west Kalimantan), as well as less large food trees and larger gaps in canopy. Less orangutans observed in logged area.
Felton et al. 2003
East Kalimantan burnt forest did not return to pre-burn species richness in 15 years, but selectively-logged forest did.
Slik et al. 2002
Forests that were selectively logged 30 years ago in peninsular Malaysia have only 73-75% of the bird species found in primary forest
Peh et al. 2005
Selectively logged forest still yields 53% of timber, 73% of carbon and 82-100% of species biodiversity of primary forest, and so is still of important conservation value.
Putz et al. 2012
Logged forest are under threat to being converted into more profitable land use, as their regeneration isn’t happening fast enough and unprotected primary forest available for further logging is running out… by 2010 all non-conserved forest was likely to have been logged at least once.
commitment by signatories to the Convention on Biodiversity to reduce the
rate of biodiversity loss also requires concerted action to reduce tropical deforestation
Laurance 2007
