Most SOD-affected forests are not managed for production of forest products. Typical land uses in affected areas include rural residential development, park lands, natural reserves, and watershed lands. The forests in these areas are prized for providing wildlife habitat, ecological benefits, recreational uses, or simply a desirable living environment (table 2-1).
Before the introduction of P. ramorum, mortality rates of SOD-susceptible oaks and tanoaks were low (see 1.5 Stand-level SOD impacts). Little or no active management was necessary to maintain forests dominated by these species. However, SOD has greatly changed the stability and sustainability of these forests. Landowners can no longer assume that the forest will remain stable under the largely passive management that worked in the past. SOD-impacted stands can undergo dramatic changes in canopy cover and vegetation composition in less than 10 years. Active management is needed in many SOD-affected forests to direct forest succession towards desired vegetation types and to restore lost ecosystem services.
General ecological services |
Carbon fixation and storage |
Air quality protection |
|
Erosion protection |
|
Water quality protection |
|
Moderation of stormwater flows / flood protection |
|
Local climate modification |
|
Nutrient cycling |
|
Plants and animals | Special status species habitat |
Locally rare or uncommon species habitat |
|
Native biodiversity protection |
|
Wildlife migration corridors and refuges |
|
Special habitat features |
|
Suppression of invasive species |
|
Human interactions | Recreational activities |
Health benefits – exercise, sunlight exposure, stress reduction |
|
Historic significance |
|
Cultural,/aesthetic, spiritual values |
|
Property value enhancement |
|
Wood products |
|
Energy conservation |
|
Other forest products - edible fungi, spices |
|
Buffering between incompatible land uses |
|
Visual impact – views, screening |
|
Noise reduction |
1While most of the general services can be provided by various forest types, the quality of habitat-related services can differ greatly between forest types.