Are there forests that are well-suited for selective logging?

There’s a lot being written right now about Swedish forest management—especially about alternatives to clearcut forestry (kalhyggesbruket). Selective logging (plockhuggning) is one such alternative, and it results in forests with trees of all sizes—so-called uneven-aged forests (fullskiktade skogar). A common claim, however, is that very few stands in Sweden can be managed profitably with selective logging, because many stands have historically been thinned from below (låggallrat): smaller trees—the ones that could have formed the basis for the next generation—were removed, while larger trees were left to keep growing. That tends to create stands where trees are roughly the same size. Thinning from below is essentially the opposite of what happens in selective logging, where you instead thin from above (höggallrar) by harvesting the larger trees.

But the idea that suitable stands are rare has turned out not to be true. A Finnish study found that 80–90% of stand types representative for Finland are more profitable to thin from above than to final fell (kalavverka). Forestry in Sweden is similar to Finland, so it’s reasonable to assume the share is similar in Sweden—and that the majority of Swedish forests are more profitable to harvest through selective logging.

The Finnish study evaluated whether stands are suitable for selective logging by taking an unbiased approach: based on what’s most economically profitable, it either recommends an action or lets the stand continue growing. The action can be either final felling (kalavverkning) or thinning from above (höggallring). The analysis considers several parameters, including the stand’s basal area (grundyta), mean diameter (medeldiameter), and the forest owner’s required rate of return.

Want to know whether selective logging would be more profitable for your forest? Get in touch and we’ll help you assess it.