Sustainable forest management for carbon, wood and biodiversity must consider natural disturbance regimes
Abstract Forests provide multiple benefits that include sequestering carbon, supporting biodiversity, and providing wood products. Managing temperate forests to achieve these benefits sustainably is challenging given the legacy of past human impacts, the complexity of forest development, and increasing but unpredictable disturbances. These intricacies prompted debate about the most effective management of temperate forests to achieve climate mitigation while sustaining forest productivity, regeneration, and diversity. Most research focused on management impacts under relatively stable environmental conditions, whereas forests are facing increasingly frequent and more severe climatic and biotic disturbances. Here, we used a regionally calibrated forest growth model to simulate the effects of forest management on carbon, biodiversity, and wood production under prevalent natural disturbances in the northeastern US. We developed scenarios combining forest management and disturbance regimes based on assumptions of species-specific tree regeneration and mortality rates. We compared passive management with no cutting that prioritizes maintaining existing forest trees with two common regional harvest practices: exploitative timber harvest that prioritizes short-term wood production and regenerative timber harvest that prioritizes regenerating biodiverse native forest tree seedlings. In the absence of natural disturbance, no cutting provides 41% higher forest carbon storage and 50% higher tree structural diversity after 100 years than exploitative or regenerative practices. The presence of drought, windstorm, pest, and disease disturbances altered these outcomes. Regenerative forest management provides 25% higher forest carbon storage and 26% higher tree structural diversity after 100 years than no cutting. Our results demonstrate that wood products and their carbon storage and fossil emission avoidance are important for determining the total climate benefits of forest management under natural disturbances. Our findings highlight that natural disturbance regimes should be considered when selecting management to promote multiple forest benefits, suggesting the need for tailored as opposed to one-size-fits-all policies to sustainably manage temperate forests worldwide.