Benefit–cost Analysis of Vegetation Management Alternatives: An Ontario Case Study
read more
Citations
Effects of precommercial thinning on the forest value chain in northwestern New Brunswick: Part 6 – Estimating the economic benefits
Conventional versus genomic selection for white spruce improvement: a comparison of costs and benefits of plantations on Quebec public lands
Effects of early cleaning on young Picea abies stands
Labour consumption models applied to motor-manual pre-commercial thinning in Finland
References
The role of vegetation management for enhancing productivity of the world's forests
A review of Canadian forest vegetation management research and practice
Understanding Financial Management: A Practical Guide
Living without herbicides in Québec (Canada): historical context, current strategy, research and challenges in forest vegetation management
Related Papers (5)
Living without herbicides in Québec (Canada): historical context, current strategy, research and challenges in forest vegetation management
Frequently Asked Questions (10)
Q2. What are the commonly used measures for conducting benefit–cost analysis?
Net present value (NPV), benefit–cost ratio (BCR) and internal rate of return (IRR) are the most commonly used measures for conducting benefit–cost analysis.
Q3. What are the four strategies that are used to manage the forest?
These are: preventive silviculture and natural regeneration, mechanical site preparation, early planting of size-adapted stock, and use of mechanical release where and when needed (Thiffault and Roy 2010).
Q4. What is the discount rate for NPV and BCR?
Given current market competitive interest rates offered by commercial banks, the authors used a real discount rate ranging from 2% to 10% to assess the sensitivity of NPV and BCR.
Q5. What was the highest IRR for all species?
The aerial herbicide treatment group produced the highest IRR (4.32% for crop species and 4.49% for all species), whereas treatments that involved cutting plus herbicides had the lowest IRR (2.50%) for crop species, and cutting alone had the lowest IRR (3.02%) for all woody species combined.
Q6. What are the effects of herbicide reduction on the landscape?
the results of their studies are applicable to the VMAP study sites only, Dacosta et al. (2011) have modelled the landscape-level effects of reduced herbicide use in two forests in northern Ontario and found that herbicide reduction would negatively affect the overall wood supply of both softwoods and hardwoods, increase costs of wood transportation and silviculture, and increase the active road network.
Q7. What are the main challenges of herbicide-free forest vegetation management in Quebec?
herbicide-free forest vegetation management strategies, which have been implementing in Quebec since 2001 when the province banned the use of forest herbicides in commercial forestry, pose major challenges to intensive silviculture, especially where high volumes of lumber and fibre are expected.
Q8. What are the risks of brush saws?
Risks of gasolineand oil spillage, and inhalation of exhaust emissions from brush saws pose potential environmental and health risks (Dubeau et al. 2003).
Q9. What is the Crown Forest Sustainability Act?
which states that “large, healthy, diverse and productive Crown forests and their associated ecological processes and biological diversity should be conserved” (Statutes of Ontario 1995).
Q10. What was the average gain in GTV for all treatment groups?
All treatment groups exhibited a considerable gain (from 3% in cutting plus herbicide to 49.7% in aerial herbicide) in average GTV at age 70 compared to the controls.