Epsilon Archive for Student Projects

Abstract

Nature conservation on certified small private forest owners- a comparison
between the two certification systems FSC and PEFC in southern Sweden
Today two different certification systems are used in Sweden to certify forest, FSC (Forest Stewardship Council) and PEFC (Pan European Forest Certification). During the last years certification of forests in general and different certification systems have frequently been debated. FSC is a globally widespread system and about 10 million ha out of 23 million ha Swedish forest is FSC-certified. The FSC-standard is mainly used by major forest companies and to some extent also by smaller private forest owners. PEFC is a European system and about 2 million ha Swedish forests is PEFC-certified today. The PEFC has three regional adaptations in Sweden and is mainly used by small private forest owners. The aim with this study was to compare nature conservation in FSC- and PEFC-certified forests in practice. I selected 20 small private certified estates in southern Sweden, 10 FSC and 10 PEFC. On clear-cuts were amount of created and left behind dead wood and number of large retention trees. At estate level I analysed the proportion of deciduous trees whitin a stand and the proportion of deciduous-dominated stands, spruce proportion in nemoral zone, proportion of protected forests and age distribution.
The result shows that the amount of dead wood after clear-cutting was the most difficult
standard variable to achieve. At average both FSC and PEFC certified estates fulfil the
minimum but several owners leave too small amounts of dead wood. The number of large
diameter trees left after a clear-cut is according to the standard as well as species composition, but their diameter is often small. All owners protect at least 5% of the forest area. The protected forest are not always the best available from a biodiversity point of view, a high proportion of the set-aside forests are low productive and/or situated on wet/moist ground. The result from this study show that FSC certified estates at average leaves for example more protected forest, more dead wood and more deciduous-dominated stands than PEFC. The FSC-certified forest also has a lower spruce-proportion than PEFC-certified owners. PEFC and FSC are equal when considering how many properties that reach the standards levels. From a nature protection point of view many levels in both FSC- and PEFC-standard are however low.

Vid certifiering av skogsbruket används idag två olika certifieringssystem, FSC (Forest Stewardship Council) och PEFC (Pan European Forest Certification). Det har debatterats flitigt huruvida certifiering är bra för naturvården och vilket system som är bäst. I denna studie undersöks hur det ser ut i praktiken på små privata fastigheter i södra Sverige. 10 st fastigheter från vardera certifieringssystemet i Skåne, Halland, Kalmar och Kronobergs län har undersökts. I fält har den kvarlämnade mängden död ved och antal naturvärdesträd vid föryngringsavverkning samt de avsatta avdelningar för naturvård undersökts. Med hjälp av fastigheternas skogsbruksplan har granandel i nemoral zon, åldersfördelning samt andel lövdominerade bestånd och lövinblandning beräknats. Lämnande av död ved var den punkt som var svårast att leva upp till för båda systemen. Dels lämnade man för lite ved samtidigt som den döda veden framförallt bestod av gran. Naturvärdesträdens antal var i de flesta fall godkända liksom trädslagsfördelningen, dock var grovleken låg med tanke på syftet att lämna dem. När det gäller avsatta avdelningar för naturvårdsändamål var en hög andel lågproduktiv och fuktig eller blöt mark. Resultatet visade på att FSC i genomsnitt var något bättre än PEFC då man bl a lämnade mer död ved, mer lövdominerade bestånd och mer avsatt skog för naturvårdsändamål. Ser man till antalet fastigheter som når satta mål var systemen likvärdiga. Ur en naturvårdssynvinkel är dock många av standardkriterierna lågt satta.