Next Article in Journal
Extraction of Arbors from Terrestrial Laser Scanning Data Based on Trunk Axis Fitting
Previous Article in Journal
Mapping Planted Forests in the Korean Peninsula Using Artificial Intelligence
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Forests
Volume 15
Issue 7
10.3390/f15071218
forests-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Cost of Regeneration of Scots Pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) Crops in National Forests

by
Sławomir Okoń
1,
Marek Wieruszewski
2,*,
Joanna Dynowska
3,
Anna Ankudo-Jankowska
4 and
Krzysztof Adamowicz
4
1
Regional Directorate of State Forests in Radom, ul. 25 Czerwca, 68, 26-600 Radom, Poland
2
Department Mechanical Wood Technology, Faculty of Forestry and Wood Technology, Poznan University of Life Sciences, Wojska Polskiego 28, 60-637 Poznan, Poland
3
Institute of Management and Quality Sciences, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, 10-719 Olsztyn, Poland
4
Department of Forestry Economics and Technology, Faculty of Forestry and Wood Technology, Poznan University of Life Sciences, Wojska Polskiego 71c, 60-625 Poznan, Poland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Forests 2024, 15(7), 1218; https://doi.org/10.3390/f15071218
Submission received: 11 June 2024 / Revised: 6 July 2024 / Accepted: 11 July 2024 / Published: 13 July 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Forest Ecology and Management)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Silvicultural processes are an essential issue of rational forest management. Both man-made (artificial) and natural restoration methods are used in European forestry. A study of the cost drivers of forest restoration from the early stages of land clearing to cultivation was conducted for Scots pine tracts in a coniferous forest habitat. The cost data were tested for homogeneity of variance (Levene’s test) and normality (Shapiro–Wilk test) using a significance level of α = 0.05. The research indicated that the cost of artificial restoration (planting) of a pine forest is about 30% higher than the cost of natural restoration. The research also indicated that the main cost driver (about 35%) of the artificial restoration process was seedlings and planting costs. Further, the viability of supplementing natural planting with artificial planting was confirmed.

1. Introduction

Scots pine is the main forest-forming species in Poland. This is due to its inherent biological and ecological requirements, allowing it to occupy vast areas on poor soils mostly formed on post-glacial sands [1,2,3,4]. Changes in the natural environment caused by climatic changes and the lowering of the groundwater level, among other things, make it necessary to constantly revise existing silviculture methods in the early stages from inception to cultivation. This results in the need to undertake new research on the possibilities of restoring ponderosa (Scots) pine using both natural restoration and man-made (artificial) restoration via planting [5,6]. Natural restoration is promoted to achieve relatively greater forest sustainability through natural selection of trees under conditions of stable equilibrium [7]. In practice, however, the most common method of pine restoration is planting trees with bare or covered root methods. This method is considered very effective, making it possible to achieve successful forest restoration in a short period of time, even in difficult environmental conditions, such as afforesting post-agricultural land or post-industrial areas. Each of the above-mentioned methods of restoration influences the growth of trees and the silviculture quality of the stands thus created [8,9]. There are significant advantages and disadvantages to different restoration methods, not least of which is the associated cost [10,11].
Restoration methods for pine stands are closely related to the evolutionary history of this species [12,13]. Pine has developed a number of adaptive traits that ensure its adaptation to conditions in the early stages of germination and growth [12]. These traits include a long photoperiod, resistance to excessive insolation, heat, and frost, a relatively fast growth rate in terms of height during youth, and an efficient and long-distance seed dispersal method. For this reason, pine is most often used to restore open areas. The characteristics described above are typical of a pioneer species, which have small but very numerous seeds carried by the wind over long distances, high growth rates in the early stages of life, and resistance to climatic extremes. In economic practice, two methods of tree restoration are distinguished—natural and artificial [14,15]. With regard to pine, the natural restoration of pine trees can be achieved by top seeding (top self-sowing), side seeding (lateral self-sowing), or a combination of top and side seeding, the so-called “combined self-sowing”.
According to Jaworski [14], there are two types of top seeding that promote natural pine restoration: (1) Top seeding with a two-year overstory involves stands representing valuable ecotypes being regenerated. Renewal in such stands should occur before the age of felling. (2) Top seeding with a short or medium period of renewal (use of existing underplanted pine restoration) is recommended for habitats of fresh coniferous forest, fresh mixed coniferous forest, and especially moist coniferous forest and mixed moist coniferous forest.
In practice, the more common method of natural pine restoration is lateral self-seeding, which is most widely used in the restoration of clear-cuts in strip-like clear-cutting. The most convenient situations for restoration with lateral self-seeding are clear-cuts with an elongated shape located perpendicular to the direction of the prevailing winds. Ideally, the width of the logging strips should be between 40 and 45 m. In the event that the strips are wider, e.g., a width of about 60 m, it is necessary to leave (wind-breaking) berms. Then, a strip of 10 m wide is set aside at a distance of about 30 m from the mother stand, containing 15 of the phenotypically best trees per 100 running meters. These trees are intended to seed the furthest part of the clear-cutting area, where seeding from the stand adjacent to the clear-cut could be insufficient. Seedlings can be removed after 3–4 years.
In addition to top and side sowing, combinations of both are sometimes used, i.e., combined sowing, which combines the features of the above restoration methods. Initiation of the natural restoration of pine is advisable in good-quality seed source stands (seed stands), as well as in stands that are remarkable for their resilience, rarity, etc. Despite the fact that natural restoration has many advantages and is being used on an increasing scale, the primary method of pine restoration is artificial restoration by means of planting.
In each case of pine renewal, a number of economic activities are performed to prepare the area for renewal, i.e., cleaning up the remains of felled trees, preparing the soil, planting trees (in the case of artificial restoration), making corrections and additions, loosening the soil, destroying troublesome vegetation, removing excess competing trees and shrubs, thinning the crop as necessary, and tending to the new plants. Depending on the method of pine restoration, these procedures may vary in terms of labor intensity and cost [8,9].
The purpose of this study is to analyze the silviculture costs incurred to renew pine stands and to manage them through the cultivation stage. Two methods of renewal were evaluated, natural renewal from lateral self-sowing and artificial renewal by means of planting.
The purpose of the study is as follows:
  • It was decided to determine the cost of silviculture from the early stages of forest area preparation to cultivation in the case of restoration by artificial renewal compared to in the case of natural renewal.
  • The main cost factors were separated.
  • It was assumed that we could change the system of restoration by introducing only natural renewal.
  • An additional intention was to assess the impact of natural renewal on the quality of the next generation of the forest.
The study area consisted of cuttings in the Zwoleń Forest District Regional Directorate of State Forests in Radom, Poland. The main objective of this study was to assess the practicality of changing the renewal system from an artificial to a natural one, taking into account regional ecological factors (Central European region) and local economic conditions. The authors seized on the hypothesis of a much lower cost of natural restoration for ponderosa pine in coniferous forest habitat types.

2. Materials and Methods

Research for this study regarding the renewal of Scots pine crops was conducted in the Zwoleń Forest District, which is part of the Regional Directorate of State Forests in Radom, Poland. According to the natural forestry regionalization of Poland [16], the forests of the Zwoleń Forest District are almost entirely located in the VI Małopolska Land in the Radomsko-Kozienicka Plain mesoregion (VI. 3). Climatic conditions in the forest district are characterized by annual precipitation of about 650 mm, average annual air temperature in the range of 8.0–8.5 °C, and a growing season lasting about 200–210 days [17].
The silvicultural cost analysis was based on sixteen research plots, including eight restored naturally (N) via self-sown lateral seeding and eight restored artificially (S) between 2009 and 2022. The plots are located in four forest ranges (Jawor, Patków, Sucha, and Wilczy Bór), with a selection of four plots per range (Table 1).
In addition to the cost of seedlings and planting, the economic analysis considered all silvicultural costs from the initiation of restoration (after the removal of mature timber) until the first clearing of the crop, including grinding up logging residues, removing undergrowth, preparing the soil, tending the soil, and performing early clearing. Labor and material costs were adjusted for inflation. An ‘apples to apples’ comparison of restoration costs was facilitated by using relatively physically homogeneous samples with similar regional forest characteristics and forest upkeep processes. All costs in the analyses are denominated in the national currency (PLN) and are normalized to represent one hectare of restoration (PLN/ha). Descriptive statistics were generated for the cost of individual activities as well as for the total cost. In order to compare the average magnitude of the costs of silvicultural activities across individual study locations, an analysis was performed with a general linear model (GLM) from the Statistica package [18]; the method of restoration (S/N) was a factor and the location of the plot (forestry) was a random factor. The cost data were tested for homogeneity of variance (Levene’s test) and normality (Shapiro–Wilk test) using a significance level of α = 0.05.

3. Results

The total average cost over the initial period of tree growth was 8769 PLN (Table 2), with a range between 6163 and 13,869 PLN (from 70% to 158% of the average value) and a coefficient of variation (CV) of about 23%. The total average cost was 7719 PLN for natural restoration and 9819 PLN for artificial renewal, a difference of 27%. In both cases, the costs showed similar variability in aggregate distribution. Considering the full cost range, the highest artificial restoration cost was more than double the lowest natural restoration cost.
As a result of the analysis of variance performed, the method of restoration (p = 0.04) was determined to have a statistically significant impact on total silviculture cost; the location of the study plot was statistically insignificant (p = 0.07) (Figure 1). A statistical test determining the significance of the effect of the restoration method on the cost of forestry work was confirmed for all four pairs of coniferous forest plots considered.
As a result of the analysis of the components of silviculture costs from inception to cultivation, it was found that the highest costs were associated with seedlings and planting (Table 3, Figure 2) as part of artificial restoration. The costs of chopping up logging residues were also significant, followed by soil preparation, early clearing, and soil tending. The lowest costs were associated with preparing the area for seeding by removing the remaining undergrowth after felling.
As shown in Table 4, the cost of individual silvicultural activities did not differ significantly between methods of restoration, i.e., the costs for a particular activity have roughly the same cost for both rows N and S; however, the cost of these activities did vary significantly among different physical locations within each N/S group, as evidenced by the high coefficient of variation (CV) values determined for these activities. Of course, the exception is the cost of seedlings and planting specific to the artificial restoration variant, where the cost amounted to 2999 PLN per hectare of restoration, or over 35% of the total silviculture cost (Figure 2).

4. Discussion

Until recently, the primary and preferred method of restoring Scots pine was artificial restoration, involving the planting of one-year-old seedlings. This method was used mainly due to the ease and speed of achieving restoration. The rapid growth of the pine in the first years after planting the crop was also an important element due to competition from herbaceous vegetation [19,20]. Of course, natural restoration was the original restoration method in Poland; artificial restoration was introduced and began being used in the 19th century [21]. Nowadays, natural restoration is being used more and more due to the changes being seen in the environment. The natural restoration of pine is also favored by the local habitat, i.e., the dominance of boreal forests, the frequent fertility of pine seeds [22], and the belief that this way of restoration is more beneficial from an ecological and economic point of view [23]. Natural restoration preserves the genetic characteristics of the propagated stand and local ecotypes and reduces the cost of establishing crops, which plays a significant role [24]. For this reason, semi-natural silviculture is increasingly being applied [25,26] and uses the natural restoration of not only deciduous species, fir, and spruce, but also of pine [6,27,28].
In the case of the analyzed plots within the Zwoleń Forest District (RDSF Radom), natural restoration was about 30% less expensive than artificial restoration. The increased costs associated with the artificial variant are mainly due to the additional cost of purchasing seedlings and planting them, which account for over 35% of the total cost. Aside from the ecological benefits of natural restoration in changing environmental conditions, cost is undoubtedly an important consideration when planning restoration and choosing a restoration method.
The natural approach is the best way to preserve the high genetic richness of the new generation of pine stands [7,29,30]. However, a complex set of natural, organizational–technical, and economic factors must be considered before deciding to use a particular restoration method. In recent years, there have been many works related to the natural restoration of Scots pine with regard to soil preparation methods [31,32,33,34], as well as obtaining single- or multi-generational pine stands [35,36,37,38,39,40,41]. The natural restoration method presented in the present study’s results refers to a narrow area of habitat (coniferous forest) and a selected species of Scots pine. In the case of this species, the level of reduction in planting costs is significant for natural lands where this species dominates and has developed strong seed trees. For other species and forest area surveys, the decisive factor is the share of mechanization and the cost of preparatory work; according to the present study, this represented about 35% of the total cost.
The effectiveness of the natural restoration method depends not only on adherence to all of the rules related to the typing of the area to be regenerated, the timing of the initiation and performance of restoration cuts, and the protection and care of volunteer seedlings, but also on weather conditions, especially the amount and distribution of precipitation during the growing season. Note that in rainfall-deficient years, there is a risk of pine restoration failure due to poor seed emergence, low seedling survival, and poor seedling growth and quality [42,43]. Therefore, the choice of the right method of pine restoration should be determined not only based on economic considerations, but also forest function and environmental conditions, as each method has its own advantages and disadvantages. Good forest management methods are only those that have a long history of emergence and improvement through experience gathered by practice. An advantage of artificial restoration is that it allows for a more accurate selection of the genotype (planned) of the introduced seedlings. This improves the quality condition of the stand. Conversely, in the case of natural restoration, quality is obtained for the most adapted seedlings. A potential disadvantage of natural restoration is the random location of seedlings and the lack of even distribution of seedlings. This requires additional processes for the replenishment of seedlings. Even decisions based on good discernment will always be subject to significant risks; these risks can be mitigated but not eliminated [44,45].

5. Conclusions

The present study pointed to basic results, indicating that the artificial regeneration of pine forests cannot be abandoned. The most important cost elements of the process of coniferous forest regeneration in both studied methods were also determined.
  • The costs of silviculture from the early stages of preparing the forest area to cultivation are about 30% higher in restoration methods by means of artificial planting than in natural restoration methods by means of side sowing. With the rising cost of maintaining forests, this provides significant justification for taking measures to implement natural restoration methods whenever practical.
  • The main factor driving this increased cost at the renewal stage is seedlings and planting costs, representing over 35% of all analyzed costs from inception to cultivation. It is not possible to completely abandon artificial (plantation) planting; there are unavoidable gaps in natural planting.
  • The costs of preparing the area for renewal, preparing the soil, tending the soil, and performing the first early clearing are comparable in both the natural and artificial methods of forest restoration.
  • In the case of natural propagation, in addition to economic benefits, there is an improvement in the quality of the next generation of the forest. Such restoration strengthens a forest’s ability to replenish its numbers and maintain genotypes adapted to the local microclimate.
As a result of the analysis of variance, it was determined that the method of reclamation had a statistically significant impact on the total cost of reclamation, and the location of the plots was statistically insignificant.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.O. and K.A.; methodology, K.A.; software, J.D.; validation, M.W., A.A.-J. and J.D.; formal analysis, M.W.; investigation, M.W.; resources, S.O.; data curation, A.A.-J.; writing—original draft preparation, S.O.; writing—review and editing, M.W.; visualization, J.D.; supervision, K.A.; project administration, M.W. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The publication of this study was financed by the Polish Minister of Science and Higher Education as part of the Strategy of the Poznan University of Life Sciences for 2024–2026 in the field of improving scientific research and development work in priority research areas.

Data Availability Statement

The Data are included in this publication.

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful for the assistance during the study from the Regional Directorate of State Forests in Radom.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Boratyński, A. Systematyka i geograficzne rozmieszczenie. (Systematics and geographic distribution). In Biologia Sosny Zwyczajnej (Biology of the Scots Pine); Białobok, S., Ed.; Wydawnictwo Sorus: Kórnik/Poznań, Poland, 1993; pp. 45–69. [Google Scholar]
  2. Akyol, A.; Örücü, Ö.K.; Arslan, E.S. Habitat suitability mapping of stone pine (Pinus pinea L.) under the effects of climate change. Biologia 2020, 75, 2175–2187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Pietrzykowski, M. Soil quality index as a tool for Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) monoculture conversion planning on afforested, reclaimed mine land. J. For. Res. 2014, 25, 63–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Sewerniak, P. Wpływ Warunków Glebowych na Kształtowanie się Bonitacji Drzewostanów Sosnowych. (Influence of Soil Conditions on the Formation of Pine Stand Qualities). Ph.D. Dissertation, Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń, Warszawa, Poland, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  5. Czacharowski, M.; Drozdowski, S. Zagospodarowanie drzewostanów sosnowych (Pinus sylvestris L.) w zmieniających się uwarunkowaniach środowiskowych i społecznych. (Management of pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) stands under changing environmental and social conditions). Sylwan 2021, 156, 355–370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Hille, M.; den Ouden, J. Improved recruitment and early growth of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) seedlings after fire and soil scarification. Eur. J. For. Res. 2004, 123, 213–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Giertych, M. Doskonalenie Składu Genetycznego Populacji Drzew Leśnych. (Improving the Genetic Composition of Forest Tree Populations); SGGW-AR: Warszawa, Poland, 1989. [Google Scholar]
  8. Andrzejczyk, T.; Drozdowski, S. Rozwój naturalnego odnowienia sosny zwyczajnej na powierzchni przygotowanej pługiem dwuodkładnicowym. Sylwan 2003, 149, 19–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Andrzejczyk, T.; Drozdowski, S.; Szeligowski, H. Wpływ przygotowania gleby na zagęszczenie, wzrost i jakość samosiewów sosny w warunkach podokapowych. Sylwan 2003, 147, 19–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Kunstler, G.; Curt, T.; Lepart, J. Spatial pattern of beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) and oak (Quercus pubescens Mill.) seedlings in natural pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) woodlands. Eur. J. For. Res. 2004, 123, 331–337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Wieruszewski, M.; Mydlarz, K. The Influence of Habitat Conditions on the Properties of Pinewood. Forests 2021, 12, 1311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Brzeziecki, B. Strategie życiowe gatunków drzew leśnych. (Life history strategies of forest tree species). Sylwan 2000, 144, 5–14. Available online: https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/812183.pdf (accessed on 22 May 2024).
  13. Sukhbaatar, G.; Ganbaatar, B.; Jamsran, T.; Purevragchaa, B.; Nachin, B.; Gradel, A. Assessment of early survival and growth of planted Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris) seedlings under extreme continental climate conditions of northern Mongolia. J. For. Res. 2020, 31, 13–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Jaworski, A. Charakterystyka Hodowlana Drzew Leśnych; GUTENBERG: Kraków, Poland, 1995. [Google Scholar]
  15. Pretzsch, H.; del Río, M.; Ammer, C.; Avdagic, A.; Barbeito, I.; Bielak, K.; Brazaitis, G.; Coll, L.; Dirnberger, G.; Drössler, L.; et al. Growth and yield of mixed versus pure stands of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) and European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) analysed along a productivity gradient through Europe. Eur. J. For. Res. 2015, 134, 927–947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Zielony, R.; Kliczkowska, A. Regionalizacja Przyrodniczo-Leśna Polski 2010. (Natural and Forest Regionalization of Poland 2010); CILP: Warszawa, Poland, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  17. Kondracki, J. Geografia Regionalnej Polski. (Regional Geography of Poland); Wyd. II. PWN.: Warszawa, Poland, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  18. StatSoft Inc. TIBCO Software Inc., Statistica (Data Analysis Software System), Version 13. 2017. Available online: http://statistica.io (accessed on 1 January 2024).
  19. Löf, M.; Gemmel, U.; Nilsson, U.; Welander, N.T. The influence of site preparation on growth in Quercus robur L. seedlings in a southern Sweden clear-cut and shelterwood. For. Ecol. Manag. 1998, 109, 241–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Löf, M.; Dey, D.C.; Navarro, R.M.; Jacobs, D.F. Mechanical site preparation for forest regeneration. New For. 2012, 43, 825–848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Pardos, M.; Montes, F.; Aranda, I.; Cañellas, I. Influence of environmental conditions on germinant survival and diversity of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) in central Spain. Eur. J. For. Res. 2007, 126, 37–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Aleksandrowicz-Trzcińska, M.; Drozdowski, S.; Studnicki, M.; Żybura, H. Effects of Site Preparation Methods on the Establishment and Natural-Regeneration Traits of Scots Pines (Pinus sylvestris L.) in Northeastern Poland. Forests 2018, 9, 717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Mattsson, L.; Li, C.-Z. The non-timber value of northern Swedish Forest—An economic analysis. Scand. J. For. Res. 1993, 8, 426–434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Hyytiäine, K.; Ilomäki, S.; Mäkelä, A.; Kinnunen, K. Economic analysis of stand establishment for Scots pine. Can. J. For. Res. 2006, 36, 1179–1189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Pommerening, A.; Murphy, S.T. A review of the history, definitions and methods of continuous cover forestry with special attention to afforestation and restocking. Forestry 2004, 77, 27–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Lei, X.; Lu, Y.; Peng, C.; Zhang, X.; Chang, J.; Hong, L. Growth and structure development of semi-natural larch-spruce-fir (Larix olgensis–Picea jezoensis–Abies nephrolepis) forests in northeast China: 12-year results after thinning. For. Ecol. Manag. 2007, 240, 165–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Pajtík, J.; Konôpka, B.; Lukac, M. Individual biomass factors for beech, oak and pine in Slovakia: A comparative study in young naturally regenerated stands. Trees 2011, 25, 277–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Axer, M.; Martens, S.; Schlicht, R.; Wagner, S. Modelling natural regeneration of European beech in Saxony, Germany: Identifying factors influencing the occurrence and density of regeneration. Eur. J. For. Res. 2021, 140, 947–968. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Scalfi, M.; Piotti, A.; Rossi, M.; Piovani, P. Genetic variability of Italian southern Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) populations: The rear edge of the range. Eur. J. For. Res. 2009, 128, 377–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Belletti, P.; Ferrazzini, D.; Piotti, A.; Monteleone, I.; Ducci, F. Genetic variation and divergence in Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) within its natural range in Italy. Eur. J. For. Res. 2012, 131, 1127–1138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Drozdowski, S. Wpływ różnych sposobów przygotowania gleby na wyniki naturalnego odnowienia sosny zwyczajnej (Pinus sylvestris L.). (Effects of different soil preparation methods on the results of natural regeneration of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.)). Acta Sci. Pol. Silvarum Colendarum Ratio Ind. Lignaria 2002, 1, 27–34. [Google Scholar]
  32. Aleksandrowicz-Trzcińska, M.; Drozdowski, S.; Brzeziecki, B.; Rutkowska, P.; Jabłońska, B. Effects of different methods of site preparation on natural regeneration of Pinus sylvestris in Eastern Poland. Dendrobiology 2014, 71, 73–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Błońska, E.; Bednarz, B.; Kacprzyk, M.; Piaszczyk, W.; Lasota, J. Effect of scots pine forest management on soil properties and carabid beetle occurrence under post-fire environmental conditions—A case study from Central Europe. For. Ecosyst. 2020, 7, 28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Rautio, P.; Hallikainen, V.; Valkonen, S.; Karjalainen, J.; Puttonen, P.; Bergsten, U.; Winsa, H.; Hyppönen, M. Manipulating overstory density and mineral soil exposure for optimal natural regeneration of Scots pine. For. Ecol. Manag. 2023, 539, 120996. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Tarasiuk, S.; Zwieniecki, M. Social-structure dynamics in uneven-aged Scots pine (Pinus silvestris) regeneration under conopy at the Kaliszki reserve, Kampinoski National Park (Poland). For. Ecol. Manage. 1990, 35, 227–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Huth, F.; Wehnert, A.; Wagner, S. Natural Regeneration of Scots Pine Requires the Application of Silvicultural Treatments such as Overstorey Density Regulation and Soil Preparation. Forests 2022, 13, 817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Andrzejczyk, T. Wpływ odległości od ściany drzewostanu na zagęszczenie i przeżywalność nalotów sosny zwyczajnej (Pinus sylvestris L.) na zrębach zupełnych i gniazdach. Sylwan 2000, 144, 27–42. Available online: https://agro.icm.edu.pl/agro/element/bwmeta1.element.agro-article-77f30fcb-f531-4a05-a058-3cfb39e9810a (accessed on 22 May 2024).
  38. Lavnyy, V.; Spathelf, P.; Kravchuk, R.; Vytseha, R.; Yakhnytskyy, V. Silvicultural options to promote natural regeneration of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) in Western Ukrainian forests. J. For. Sci. 2022, 68, 298–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Szmyt, J.; Tarasiuk, S. Species-specific spatial structure, species coexistence and mortality pattern in natural, uneven-aged Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.)-dominated forest. Eur. J. For. Res. 2018, 137, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Szeligowski, H.; Buraczyk, W.; Konecka, A.; Studnicki, M.; Drozdowski, S. A multi-trait assessment of selected provenances of Scots pine following 50 years of growth on a provenance experiment in Central Poland, in the light of climate change. Eur. J. For. Res. 2023, 142, 509–520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Pretzsch, H.; Steckel, M.; Heym, M.; Biber, P.; Ammer, C.; Ehbrecht, M.; Del Río, M. Stand growth and structure of mixed-species and monospecific stands of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) and oak (Q. robur L., Quercus petraea (MATT.) LIEBL.) analysed along a productivity gradient through Europe. Eur. J. For. Res. 2020, 139, 349–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Galiano, L.; Martínez-Vilalta, J.; Lloret, F. Drought-Induced Multifactor Decline of Scots Pine in the Pyrenees and Potential Vegetation Change by the Expansion of Co-occurring Oak Species. Ecomethods 2010, 13, 978–991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Morán-López, T.; Poyatos, R.; Llorens, P.; Sabaté, S. Effects of past growth trends and current water use strategies on Scots pine and pubescent oak drought sensitivity. Eur. J. For. Res. 2014, 133, 369–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Routa, J.; Kilpeläinen, A.; Ikonen, V.P.; Asikainen, A.; Venäläinen, A.; Peltola, H. Effects of intensified silviculture on timber production and its economic profitability in boreal Norway spruce and Scots pine stands under changing climatic conditions. For. Int. J. For. Res. 2019, 92, 648–658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Mason, W.L. Implementing Continuous Cover Forestry in Planted Forests: Experience with Sitka Spruce (Picea Sitchensis) in the British Isles. Forests 2015, 6, 879–902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Forests 15 01218 g001
Figure 1. The average values of the costs of silvicultural works, considering the location (forestry: J—Jawor, P—Patków, S—Sucha, and WB—Wilczy Bór) and the method of restoration (N—natural, S—by planting) in the Zwoleń Forest District.
Figure 1. The average values of the costs of silvicultural works, considering the location (forestry: J—Jawor, P—Patków, S—Sucha, and WB—Wilczy Bór) and the method of restoration (N—natural, S—by planting) in the Zwoleń Forest District.
Forests 15 01218 g001
Forests 15 01218 g002
Figure 2. Percentage share of costs of individual activities in cost of renewal and care in cultivation phase: SP—saplings and planting; EC—early cleaning; S.C.—soil care; SS—soil scarification; Sh—shredding; RU—removal of undergrowth (N—natural restoration, S—artificial restoration by planting).
Figure 2. Percentage share of costs of individual activities in cost of renewal and care in cultivation phase: SP—saplings and planting; EC—early cleaning; S.C.—soil care; SS—soil scarification; Sh—shredding; RU—removal of undergrowth (N—natural restoration, S—artificial restoration by planting).
Forests 15 01218 g002
Table 1. Characteristics of study plots.
Table 1. Characteristics of study plots.
Forest RangeDepartment and Location Address Area [ha]Year *How RestoredHabitatSpecies Composition of Renewal
Jawor (J)83h 51.183694, 21.5024213.362022NBMśw10 P.S.
84h 51.184059, 21.4964281.702022NBMśw10 P.S.
89h 51.179151, 21.4960353.582016SBśw10 P.S.
95d 51.171839, 21.4876133.932014SBśw8 P.S., 2 B.
Patków (P)65a 51.436124, 21.5318282.942015NBśw10 P.S.
45g 51.455412, 21.5211043.822018NBśw9 P.S., 1 B.
34l 51.463032, 21.5059311.212019SBśw8 P.S., 2 B.
38f 51.463387, 21.5197401.052018SBśw8 P.S., 2 B.
Sucha (S)131a 51.389157, 21.5068093.662019NBśw9 P.S., 1 B.
132d 51.386827, 21.4966811.242018NBśw9 P.S., 1 B.
184d 51.436146, 21.4778921.602010SBMśw9 P.S., 1 B.
195f 51.409840, 21.4741781.462009SBMśw8 P.S., 1 L.D., 1 B.
Wilczy Bór (WB)154i 51.388233, 21.5683751.242017NBMw9 P.S., 1 B.
149h 51.392076, 21.5650103.362020NBMw10 P.S.
153i 51.389844, 21.5731692.382013SBMśw8 P.S., 2 B.
95d 51.407490, 21.5455612.582017SBMśw8 P.S., 1 B., 1 F.S.
* Year—the year of planting trees in cultivation or the year of recognition of natural restoration. N—natural restoration; S—artificial restoration by planting; BMśw—mixed fresh coniferous forest; Bśw—fresh coniferous forest; BMw—moist mixed coniferous forest; P.S.—Pinus silwestris L.; B.—Betula L.; L.D.—Larix decidua Mill.; F.S.—Fagus sylvatica L. Coniferous forests (extremely poor soils): fresh w.l. less than 1.8–2.0 m b.g.l.; mixed coniferous forests (poor soils): fresh w.l. less than 1.8 m b.g.l.
Table 2. Descriptive statistics of crop restoration and cultivation costs.
Table 2. Descriptive statistics of crop restoration and cultivation costs.
ForestryHow to
Renew		MeanMin.Max.SDCV
PLN/ha%
Jawor (J)N8803873288731001.13
S12,20210,53413,869235819.33
Patków (P)N6631616370996629.98
S9490859110,390127213.40
Sucha (S)N639263346450821.28
S7379719575622603.52
Wilczy Bór (WB)N9050807010,030138615.31
S10,207982310,5925445.33
MeanN7719616310,030142218.42
S9819719513,869211521.54
Average 8769616313,869205223.39
N—natural restoration; S—artificial restoration by planting; SD—standard deviation; CV—coefficient of variation.
Table 3. Descriptive statistics of cost of farming activities associated with artificial restoration and cultivation.
Table 3. Descriptive statistics of cost of farming activities associated with artificial restoration and cultivation.
Silviculture ActivityMeanMin.MaxSDCV
PLN/ha%
Removal of undergrowth34510072013238.29
Shredding17611050240036020.44
Soil scarification1359979192323016.92
Soil care90195174040344.77
Early clearing1215500214162751.65
Saplings and planting29992215346644814.94
SD—standard deviation; CV—coefficient of variation.
Table 4. Statistics of natural and artificial restoration costs.
Table 4. Statistics of natural and artificial restoration costs.
Silviculture ActivityHow RestoredMeanMin.MaxSDCV
PLN/ha%
Removal of undergrowthN3162004008426.77
S37410072016844.97
ShreddingN18311400240036519.95
S16901050230036421.55
Soil scarification N1314111114401199.09
S1404979192330721.89
Soil careN99395174045045.30
S801167160032740.87
Early cleaningN1279500214170054.74
S1150600200058650.97
Saplings and panting S29992215346644814.94
N—natural restoration; S—artificial restoration by planting; SD—standard deviation; CV—coefficient of variation.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Okoń, S.; Wieruszewski, M.; Dynowska, J.; Ankudo-Jankowska, A.; Adamowicz, K. Cost of Regeneration of Scots Pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) Crops in National Forests. Forests 2024, 15, 1218. https://doi.org/10.3390/f15071218

AMA Style

Okoń S, Wieruszewski M, Dynowska J, Ankudo-Jankowska A, Adamowicz K. Cost of Regeneration of Scots Pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) Crops in National Forests. Forests. 2024; 15(7):1218. https://doi.org/10.3390/f15071218

Chicago/Turabian Style

Okoń, Sławomir, Marek Wieruszewski, Joanna Dynowska, Anna Ankudo-Jankowska, and Krzysztof Adamowicz. 2024. "Cost of Regeneration of Scots Pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) Crops in National Forests" Forests 15, no. 7: 1218. https://doi.org/10.3390/f15071218

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop