0474-B1

Finding the Best Management System for the Forests of Northern Iran

Rasoul Yousefpour^[1]

Abstract

Four systems of forest stand management were compared. First one of the most productive forest areas, including forests with different management systems was selected (Asalem Region). Then one district for each system was considered as a sample. Finally, the advantages and disadvantages of the systems were outlined and the most advantageous system with the least ecological, economical and operational problems was selected.

Four management systems have been used in recent years in the Asalem area: strip-cutting, "blue area", shelterwood and selection systems.

Strip-cutting was started in 1973 to support the pulp industries of the country, but the problem of regeneration arose and it proved unsuitable for stands of uneven ages.

"Blue area" was carried out starting in 1962 and the result was average, but some structural problems for forest stands arose.

The shelterwood system is a common system in most forest areas of Northern Iran, but it has socio-economical and ecological problems that make it not so adaptable to the special conditions of the forests.

Finally, the selection system was surveyed and found to be the best one taking into account eco-economical conditions in Northern Iran.

Introduction

Iran as a country in northern terrestrial globe is located between 25º to 40º northern latitude and 45º to 63.5º eastern longitute(Figure 1).

Figure (1) - Geografical Position of Northern Iran Forests and surveyed Districts on the Iran map.

Northern Iran forests between Caspian sea and Alborz mountain chains with 600 kilometers long and 20-70 kilometers width and located in Humid -Cold Winter position of Climogram having average rainfall of 1800 (550 to 2400)mm/year and avverage Temperature of 8.5 degree centigrade and no arid season in result (figure 2) according to nearest Climotological Station reports. The Geomorfology of area is related to second or 3^rd period and Bedrocks are Volcanic and acidic and perfect Forest-Brown soil(according to France Old Classification) is the most common soil of area too. Iran's most industrial-productive forests(such as Asalem) includes species such as:Fagus orientalis Lipsky, Quercus castanifolia L., Carpinus betulus L., Alnus sp., Parottia persica Sabeti., Acer sp., Ulmus sp., Fraxinus exelsior L., Tilia begonifolia L.,...

Asalem Region in west part of this forests is potentially more productive and Industrial and long period harvesting and different management systems done during last 40 years.SO, it is a good example place to survey these different management systems in.

Figure (2) - Climogram and Ambrothermic table of Asalem.

Materials and Method

Four Districts namely Nav,Lomir,Siahbil and Kil-e-sara (Figure 3)with with different systems of management were investigated(Table 1).

Table (1) - Districts and their systems,area,stand volume and elevation.

At first the planning books of each district (4 districts) were carefully studied and whole information about area, topography (aspect, slope, elevation) and vegetation structure of forests determined. Then the method of tree marking and harvesting took into consideration, to study Socio-economical conditions of each district, the related chapters in planning books were carefully considered and significant programs of surveing spotted. But to have a good survey on each system the result of forest utilization and management were investigated through field observations and reports of scientific studies.

At last advantage and disadvantage of each system from ecological,managemental,sustainability and socio - economical points of view determined and comparing them to gether the best management system distinguished.

Results

As the forest nursery opperations were to some extent similar for 4 districts,we can consider that the present condition of each district is mostrl related to their management system as surveyed below.

Nav district with 6338 hectars area and having managed according to Blue area method since 1961 had some problems,

Overgrazing of domestic animals resulted in unsefficient regeneration in most parts of harvested area.

Existing of charcoal making hole distributed in whole district.

Unhomogenous harvesting space resulted in stablishment of Robus sp. And Ilex sp. Shrubscausing not good regeneration and unsefficient attention to essential reforestation in disturbed,burned or badly harvestted areas that caused baring of land and stablishment of noxious spicies.

Siahbil district with 8061 hectars area and having managed according to Strip cutting method since 1973.

Due to un-even aged structure of natural stands and falling of trees parallel to steep slopes of area some problems araise,

Sttablishment of Rosa sp.,Robus sp.,Crataegus and Mespilus sp.

Regeneration un sefficiency.

Reforestation un successfullness.

Settlemet of animal husbannders and overgrazing throu strips and connsumig of tree seeds.

Flooding in near villages and destroing of rice fields by periodic floods.

Lomir district with 5655 hectars area and having managed accordinng to Shelterwood method since 1954 have been more successful than otther two methods discused above.But some Socio - economical and managemental problems were existed.

Condencing of harvesting in one fifth of district area.

Stablishment of shrubs and grass.

Addictionn of husbaders to use regeerationn unit as a rangelang.

Existing of giant infectionness trees in r. unit(very bad landscape).

Not attention to other four units opperations.

Kil-e-sara district with 1468 hectars area and having maaged accordig to selectio system since 1975.Only some econnomical problems in more road construction and managemental problems of whole district logging and wood transportation was the disadvantages of this method.But also un-even aged structureof forest stands and hard topography and some Socio- economical problems in the district by itselfd this method is more flexible and the ecological points is more attentioned,so according to Close - to- Nature and sustainable development theories this is the best management system of Region forests management.

Discussion

As the results above shows most of systems except Selection system have some ecological problems specialy in regeneration.But as far as we must try to manage forests according to sustainability and Close-to Naature theories,it is obvious that selection system is the best one.

Selection system flexibility in solving Socio- economical problems that forest residents cause and regeneration confidency and structural correlation of forest stands to tree marking goals are the most important points that erase the disadvantages face of road economical problems.

On the other hand as most european forest managing experts and Iranian silviculturists believes,due to Northern Iran forests hard topographical conditions and domination of Oriental Beech tree (Fagus Orientalis Lipsky.)as an shade tolerant tree in most parts and with special Socio-economical conditions,the only way we can be sure about sustainability and wise utilization of these forests is the most Close-To-Nature method or Selection system.

Conclusion

We can not utilize our forests without having confidence on their maintanance for next regenerations.

As these forests are unique and almost including whole traditional forests of Country(Iran), we should manage them with more emphosise on their sustainability,restoration and multiple usage utilization.

So with a little lower income but having confidence on sustainability of forests, we can act according to Selection system as the best management system of Nothern Iran forests(in Asalem Region).

Acknowledgement

This survey was a part of Rasoul Yousefpour final project to get his bachlors degree in forestry from Gulan University-Iran under supervision of Dr. t. Abkenar and financed by Guilan Natural Resources Office.

Asalem Forests

Nav District

Siahbil District

Lomir District

Kil-e-sara District

References

1 - Ahmad Mosadeq, 1996, Silviculture, Tehran University Pub.

2 - Arastoo Szaeed,1995,Fundmentals of Practical Economics in Forest Management, Tehran University Pub.

3 - Gholam A. Bansan,1966,Scientific and practical Forestry, Tehran University Pub.

4 - Forest Planning Books, 1983-Nav, 1988-Kil-e-sara, 1990-Lomir, 1993-Siahbil.

5 - John D. Mathews,1989, Silvicultural Systems, Oxford Pub.

6 - Kambiz T. Abkenar, 1998, Practical silviculture, BSc course notes, Guilan University.

7 - Mohammad R. Marvie Mohajer, 2001, complementary silviculture, MSc corse notes, Tehran University.

8 - Manouchehr Namiranian, 1997, Forest Management Notes, Tehran University.

9 - Nosrat A. Sarikhani, 1992, Forest Utilization, Tehran University Pub.