VIRGIN FORESTS AND FOREST RESERVES IN ... - Natura 2000

PROCEEDINGS OF THE INVITED LECTURERS ' REPORTS PRESENTED AT 

THE COST E4 MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE AND WORKING GROUPS 

MEETING IN LJUBLJANA, SLOVENIA 

VIRGIN FORESTS AND 

FOREST RESERVES 

IN CENTRAL AND 

EAST EUROPEAN 

COUNTRIES 

Edited by 

Jurij Diaci 

Forest Reserves 

Research Network

Forest Reserves Research 

Network 

European Commission 

ISBN 961-6020-21-8 

University of Ljubljana 

Biotechnical Faculty 

Department of Forestry and 

Renewable Forest Resources 

Slovenia 

PROCEEDINGS OF THE INVITED LECTURERS' REPORTS PRESENTED AT THE 

COST E4 MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE AND WORKING GROUPS 

MEETING IN LJUBLJANA, SLOVENIA 

VIRGIN FORESTS AND FOREST 

RESERVES IN CENTRAL AND 

EAST EUROPEAN COUNTRIES 

HISTORY, PRESENT STATUS AND FUTURE 

DEVELOPMENT 

LJUBLJANA, 25 - 28 APRIL 1998 

Ljubljana 1999

Published by 

Department of Forestry and Renewable Forest Resources - Biotechnical Faculty 

The publication of the proceedings was subsidised by The Ministry of Science and Technology of 

Slovenia 

CIP - Kataložni zapis o publikaciji 

Narodna in univerzitetna knjižnica, Ljubljana 

630*228.8(4-014) 

581.526(253:4-014) 

VIRGIN forests and forest reserves in Central and East European 

countries : history, present status and future development : 

proceedings of the invited lecturers’ reports presented at the COST E4 

management committee and working groups meeting in Ljubljana, Slovenia, 

Ljubljana, 25 - 28 April 1998 / [edited by Jurij Diaci ; English translation of 

Slovene papers Irena Watton]. - Ljubljana : Department of Forestry and 

Renewable Forest Resources - Biotechnical Faculty, 1999 

ISBN 961-6020-21-8 

1. Diaci, Jurij 

97607936 

Technical Editor and page design 

Uroš Kolar 

English translation of Slovene papers 

Irena Watton 

Printed by 

Tiskarna Pleško, Ljubljana 

Editor 

Jurij Diaci 

Cover page design 

Jurij Diaci, Uroš Kolar 

Cover page photo 

Jurij Diaci 

Printed in February 1999 

250 issues 

Po mnenju Ministrstva za znanost in tehnologijo z dne 13.01.1999 št. 415-01-10/99, sodi publikacija med 

proizvode iz 13. točke tar. št. 3 Tarife prometnega davka, za katere se plačuje 5% davek od prometa proizvodov. 

This material may not be copied or posted without explicit permission.

Proceedings of the invited lecturers' reports 

VIRGIN FORESTS AND FOREST RESERVES IN CENTRAL 

AND EAST EUROPEAN COUNTRIES 

C ONTENTS 

Jurij Diaci v-vii Preface 

Jari Prviainen ix Introduction 

Konrad Pintarić 1-15 Forestry and Forest Reserves in 

Bosnia and Herzegovina 

Libor Hort, Vladimír Tesař, 

Tomáš Vrška 

Slavko Matić 17-24 The Forests of Croatia - Country 

Report 

25-44 Forest Reserve Research Network - 

The Czech Republic Country Report 

Roman Zielony 45-66 Natural Forests and Forests 

Protected by Law in Poland 

Gheorghe Florian Borlea 67-86 Forest Reserves and their Research 

in Romania 

Miha Adamič 87-93 The Brown Bear in Slovenia - 

Natural Heritage or a Nuisance? 

Andrej Bončina 95-110 Stand Dynamics of the Virgin Forest 

Rajhenavski Rog (Slovenia) During 

the Past Century 

Tomaž Hartman 111-120 Hundred Years of Virgin Forest 

Conservation in Slovenia 

Dušan Mlinšek 121-132 Forestry in Slovenia as a Proof of 

Nature’s Unpredictability, 

Bifurcation, etc. 

Jean-Francois Matter 133-143 Forest Reserve Research in 

Switzerland 

Jari Parviainen 145-171 

162-171 

Strict Forest Reserves in Europe - 

Efforts to Enhance Biodiversity and 

Strenghten Research Related to 

Natural Forests in Europe 

Appendix 1: Summary of the COST 

E4 Country Reports

COST Action E4: Forest Reserves Research Network v 

PREFACE 

Background information on the meeting 

Protection of virgin forests and establishing new forest reserves are preconditions for 

successful scientific research in natural science. They are also of importance for 

conservation of the natural heritage and promotion of other social functions of the forest. 

For forest management practice it is vitally important to gain insight into the structure and 

development of natural forests. Therefore, forest reserves are reference sites for assessing 

the efficiency of close-to-nature forest management. 

Since nature protection and close-to-nature forest management are slowly gaining 

recognition all over Europe, the awareness of the significance of forest reserves has also 

arisen. A number of countries started recently to develop or to widen the existing network 

of forest reserves and to study them regularly. The fast development of this field has also 

been promoted by international co-operation and a joint research approach, such as the 

COST Action E4 ‘Forest Reserves Research Network’ 1 . Slovenia has actively participated 

in this project since its beginning in November 1996. The initiative to organise a meeting 

in Slovenia was accepted at the meeting of the COST Action E4 in Brussels in November 

1997. The main reason for entrusting the task to Slovenia is its tradition of virgin forest 

research and the efficient transfer of results to forest management practice. 

The international professional public is well acquainted with the fact that the largest 

remains of temperate virgin forests in Europe are situated in Eastern and Central Europe, 

for instance, Bialowieza in Poland or Peručica in Bosnia and Herzegovina. It is less well 

known, however, that in these countries there is a rich tradition of protection and research 

of forest reserves. In Austria-Hungary, for example, some of the most important remains 

of virgin forests were protected as early as the last century (JOHANN 1990). In Bohemia 

‘Žofinský virgin forest’ in the Novohradské Mts. was protected as early as 1838 on the 

owner’s initiative (the study by HORT et al. in the proceedings, pp. 25-44), while in 

Poland ‘Ziesbuch forest’ was protected in 1827 (ZIELONY ibid., pp. 45-66). In Slovenia 

the protection of virgin forests was introduced in 1892 when virgin forests were first 

mentioned in forest management plans of the Kočevje region (HARTMAN ibid., pp. 111- 

120). 

After the Second World War foresters in particular undertook systematic investigation of 

virgin forests in Central and Eastern Europe. Professor Leibundgut and his associates 

(LEIBUNDGUT 1959) played a key role in studying the importance of virgin forests and forest 

reserves in Europe. He initiated the first basic research in virgin forests of Central and 

Eastern Europe. His research team developed a network of new forest reserves in 

Switzerland, where only two minor virgin forest remains (Scatle, Derborence) were 

1 The COST Action E4 is presented in the Introduction by the Chairman of the Action. More detailed 

presentation with preliminary results of the Action are given in Parviainen’s paper on pages 145-171 of the 

proceedings.

vi 

Preface 

preserved, and took on systematic research. The example was followed by Slovenia 

(MLINŠEK 1967, 1976) and other Central and East European countries (PINTARIČ 1978, 

PRÙŠA 1985, KORPEL 1995, PRPIČ and SELETKOVIČ 1996). 

Organisation of the meeting and preparation of the proceedings 

The third plenary session of the management committee and of the working groups of the 

COST meeting started with a two-days excursion to virgin forests of the Koèevje region, 

to mountain forests of Pokljuka (the Triglav National Park) and to the littoral part of 

Slovenia (Karst). Thirteen experts from Slovenia and 46 from other European countries 

participated. Prominent scientists from Central and East European countries with a rich 

tradition of protection and investigation of forest reserves, which do not formally cooperate 

in the COST Action E4, were also invited to take part in the meeting. In invited 

lecturers’ reports they presented the development of the concept of forest reserves and 

their current situation in individual countries. Their reports represent an important 

contribution to the Action and are published in the proceedings. An important part of the 

meeting was held in the field, therefore some of the more extensive contributions 

presented in the field are also included in the proceedings. The reports of the remaining 

Central and East European countries that participate in the Action (Slovenia, Slovakia, 

Russia and Hungary) are published in the joint proceedings of the Action (PARVIAINEN 

1999). A short summary of the country reports by Mr Parviainen is presented in this 

proceedings on pages 162-171. 

In the present proceedings, the reports have been arranged alphabetically according to 

participating countries. They are published as they were presented at the meeting but in a 

smaller format and with some graph or chart changes to achieve better resolution. The 

contents of each individual report are the sole responsibility of the author. 

All involved in the organisation of the meeting in Slovenia wish that the present 

proceedings will contribute to a further insight into different approaches to the 

investigation of virgin forests in Europe and to a link between them, as well as to a 

broader discussion and further research in this field. 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 

The meeting in Slovenia and the publication of the proceedings were made possible by: 

The Department of Forestry and Renewable Forest Resources of the Biotechnical Faculty, 

University of Ljubljana, the COST Action E4 of the European Union, and the Ministry of 

Science and Technology of the Republic of Slovenia within the framework of projects 

MS-42797 and J4-0513-0488-98. Objectives of the meeting were successfully achieved 

with the aid of the Forest Institute of Slovenia, the Slovenian Forest Service, and the 

Triglav National Park. 

Our particular thanks for assistance in the organisation of the meeting are due to: 

– Mr. Albin Babič of the Ministry of Science and Technology of the Republic of 

Slovenia,

COST Action E4: Forest Reserves Research Network vii 

– Professor Milan Hočevar, Director, Assistant Professor Hojka Kraigher, and Dr. 

Primož Simončič of the Forest Institute of Slovenia, 

– Professor Miha Adamič, Head, Professor Dušan Mlinšek, Professor Boštjan Anko, 

and Assistant Professor Andrej Bončina of the Department of Forestry and Renewable 

Forest Resources, 

– Mr. Tomaž Hartman, Mr. Mladen Prebevšek, and Mr. Miro Kapus of the Slovenian 

Forest Service, 

– Mr. Martin Šolar of the Triglav National Park, 

– Mr. Dušan Roženbergar and Ms. Lena Marion, the students of the Forestry 

Department. 

We owe special thanks to Mr. Uroš Kolar for his dedicated and unremitting help with the 

organisation of the meeting and preparation of the proceedings. 

REFERENCES 

KORPEL, Š. (1995) Die Urwälder der Westkarpaten. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Stuttgart, Jena, New 

York, 310 pp. 

LEIBUNDGUT, H. (1959) Über Zweck und Methodik der Struktur- und Zuwachsanalyse von 

Urwäldern. Schweiz. Z. Forstwes. 110 (3), pp. 111-124. 

MLINŠEK, D. (1967) Verjüngung und Entwicklung der Dickungen im Tannen-Buchen Urwald ‘Rog’ 

(Slowenien). München, 14. IUFRO Kongress, Referate, Band IV, pp. 436-442. 

MLINŠEK, D. (1976) Zur Ausscheidung von neuen Wald - und Urwaldreservaten (am Beispiel von 

Slowenien). IUFRO-Beitrag, Oslo Kongress Gruppe S1, pp. 1-3. 

PARVIAINEN, J. et al. (eds.) (1999) Research in Forest Reserves and Natural Forests in European 

Countries, EFI Proceedings No. 16, pp. 9-35. 

PINTARIČ, K. (1978) Urwald Peruèica als natürliches Forschungslaboratorium. Allg. Forstzeitschrift, 

24, pp.702-707. 

PRPIČ, B. / SELETKOVIČ, Z. (1996) The research in Croatian virgin forests and the application of 

results to natural forests. In: Mayer, B., Skrb za hrvatske šume od 1946. do 1996.: Unapređenje 

proizvodnje biomase šumskih ekosustava. Zagreb, 1, pp. 97-104. 

PRÙŠA, E. (1985) Die böhmischen und mährischen Urwälder - ihre Struktur und Ökologie, Praga, 

Verlag der Tschechoslowakischen Akademie der Wisenschaften, 578 pp. 

JOHANN, E. (1990) Forestry as opposed to nature conservation?: The development of Austrian 

silviculture during the first half of the twentieth century and its contribution to nature and 

landscape protection. IUFRO XIX World Congress, Montreal, Canada, Aug. 8-11, 1990, pp. 

187- 198. 

Jurij Diaci 

National co-ordinator 

of the COST Action E4 for Slovenia 

January 1999

COST Action E4: Forest Reserves Research Network ix 

INTRODUCTION 

The European Union COST Action E4: ‘Forest Reserves Research Network’ was 

established by the COST Commission in 1995 in order to promote the co-ordination 

between countries and focus research on ‘natural’ forests. The primary objective is to 

create a European network of forest reserves, to collect ongoing research, to standardise 

research methodology and to create an accessible central data bank. Results from ‘natural’ 

forest research are important for the application of ecologically oriented silviculture, for 

improved forest management and for future planning of the forest protection network. 

There are still approximately 3 mill. hectares of natural forests left in Europe. This area is 

equivalent to 1.7% of the total forest area in Europe. The widest continuous natural 

forests can be found in Finland and Sweden and in the remote mountainous areas of 

Central and Eastern Europe. Most of these remnants are located in forest reserves, which 

are protected by law. These natural forests are left to develop freely in the state which is 

as original as possible. 

COST is a framework for scientific and technical co-operation, allowing the co-ordination 

of national programmes on a European level. Within this framework, financial support is 

given for the organisation of meetings, specific co-ordination tasks and for Short Term 

Scientific Missions. The research to be co-ordinated is funded nationally. The duration of 

the Action E4: ‘Forest Reserves Research Network’ is 4 years, ending in 1999. Nineteen 

(19) European COST member countries and over 100 researchers and environmental 

officials are involved in this project. 

The main results of the action are the publication of the country reports with data and 

definitions on forest protection and a list of research in the natural forests and reserves, 

and a review of the models and methods used for describing the structure of natural 

forests. A data bank on forest reserves, organisations, publications, research and the main 

results with free access for the participants will be established. This data bank on 

European forest reserves will be located at the European Forest Institute, Joensuu, Finland 

(for more information see home page on Internet: 

http://www.efi.fi/Database_Gateway/FRRN/). 

The 5 th Management Committee meeting with excursions to the natural forests of 

Slovenia was held in April 1998 in Ljubljana. One important goal of this meeting was to 

integrate the research in natural forests of the non-EU member countries with the Action’s 

activities. Invited speakers were asked to present the state of the art of natural forest 

research and forest protection in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Czech Republic, 

Poland, Romania, Slovenia and Switzerland. These country reports are collected and 

published in this publication. 

The country reports of the COST Action E4 member countries and Russia are published 

in the Proceedings N o 16 of the European Forest Institute. A compiled summarising article 

and table from all the contributed countries is presented also as Appendix 1 (see Table 1 

on page 169) in this publication. 

Jari Parviainen 

Chairman of the COST Action E4

COST Action E4: Forest Reserves Research Network • • • Proceedings of the Invited Lecturers' Reports ⁄ p. 1 - 15 

ABSTRACT 

FORESTRY AND FOREST RESERVES IN BOSNIA AND 

HERZEGOVINA 

by Konrad PINTARIĆ * 

In the paper the data on forests and forest reserves in Bosnia and Herzegovina are 

presented. The country is predominantly mountainous. Main tree species are: oak, beech, 

silver fir, Norway spruce, black and Scotch pine. All high forests and coppices are natural 

forests, and are managed by the single tree selection system or by the group selection 

system. In future the forest management will remain the same as today, aiming to increase 

wood production and to reach higher quality of growing stock. Conversion of coppices 

into high forests through tending will take place, and in smaller parts by clear cutting and 

change of tree species. 

The actual surface of protected forests of all sorts will be enlarged, specially the stands of 

the endemic species of Pinus heldreichii. 


Bosnia and Herzegovina is situated in the north-west of the Balkan Peninsula, lying 

between 42 0 26’ and 45 0 15’ of the northern latitude, and between 15 0 44’ and 19 0 41’ of the 

eastern longitude. Predominantly it lies on mountainous land. Out of the total area of 

51,130 km 2 , 5% is flat, 24% is hilly, 42% is mountainous, and 29% is karst region. The 

mean height above sea level is 500 m (from Neum-Klek at 0 m to Magliæ at 2387 m 

above sea level). On the hydrographic display the whole area is divided into Adriatic and 

Black Sea confluence, nevertheless most of the rivers belong to the Black Sea confluence 

(Una, Vrbas, Bosna, Drina). 

Due to the geographical position - proximity of the Adriatic Sea and the relief itself - the 

northern part of the country has a moderate continental climate with July temperatures 

ranging around 22 0 C, but only with 700 - 800 mm precipitation annually. The middle 

mountainous part has severe and snowy winters, and an abundant precipitation (1000 - 

1200 mm annually with equal distribution over a year). 

* Prof. Dr. K.P., Šumarski fakultet (Forestry Faculty), Zagrebaèka 20, 71000 Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina

2 Forestry and Forest Reserves in Bosnia and Herzegovina 

The Mediterranean climate, in the middle and lower course of the River Neretva, has 

temperate winters (3.5 0 C to -5.0 0 C), and hot dry summers (up to 24 0 C). In this region the 

maximum temperatures sometimes reach 40 0 C to 45 0 C, and the minimum winter 

temperatures reach -9 0 C to -17 0 C. In this region the annual precipitation is very high, 

from 1000 to 1500 mm annually, with the minimum in summer and the maximum in 

winter time. In this Mediterranean region the snow is very rare and remains for a very 

short period of time. 

Due to different bedrock (Figure 1) and soil conditions, Bosnia and Herzegovina has also 

very different forest associations (Figure 2 and 3). 

The total surface of Bosnia and Herzegovina is 5.113,000 ha, forest and woody landscape 

cover 2.701,000 ha (i.e. 53% of the total country surface). This area is subdivided into: 

High forests .................................................................. 1.266,000 ha (46.9%) 

Irregular coppices ......................................................... 927,000 ha (34.3%) 

Bare lands appropriate for afforestation ........................ 396,000 ha (14.7%) 

Unproductive areas ....................................................... 112,000 ha (4.1%) 

The following forest types appear: 

High forests (Total) ......................................................... 1.266,000 ha (100%) 

Oak forests .................................................................... 115,000 ha ( 9%) 

Beech forests ................................................................. 389,000 ha ( 30%) 

Mixed forests of beech, Norway spruce and silver fir ... 630,000 ha ( 50%) 

Scotch and Black pine ................................................... 96,000 ha ( 8%) 

Other high forests .......................................................... 36,000 ha ( 3%) 

Coppices (Total)................................................................ 927,000 ha (100%) 

Coppices of sessile oak (Quercus sessiliflora) .............. 218,000 ha ( 23.5%) 

Coppices of beech .......................................................... 351,000 ha ( 38.9%) 

Coppices of thermophile oaks (Adriatic region) ............. 316,000 ha ( 34.1%) 

Other coppices ............................................................... 42,000 ha ( 4.5%) 

About 20% of high forests are privately owned and the growing stock per hectare is five 

times lower than that of the state high forests. Approximately 65% of coppice area, and 

77% of bare land is owned by the state. 

All forests (high forests and coppices) are of natural origin, and biodiversity is 

remarkable. In addition to the main tree species there are more than twenty other tree 

species in all forest types. (see Table 1).

COST Action E4: Forest Reserves Research Network 3 

Figure 1: Geological map of Bosnia and Herzegovina (after ŠUMARSKA ENCIKLOPEDIJA, 

Zagreb 1980)


Figure 2: Forest associations in Bosnia and Herzegovina (after ŠUMARSKA 

ENCIKLOPEDIJA, Zagreb 1980)


Figure 3: Forest associations in Bosnia and Herzegovina 

Carpinetum orientalis croaticum Hrvatić 

Ostryeto-Seslerietum autumnalis Horv.& Horvatić 

Quercetalia pubescentis Orneto-Ostryion Tom. Querceto-Ostryetum carpinifoliae Horv. 

Quercetum confertae cerris Rudski 

Pineto-Genistetum januensis Tom.* 

Fagetum montanum croaticum Horv. 

QUERCETO Abieto-Fagetum (Fagetum croaticum abietetosum Horv.) 

FAGETEA Fagetalia Fagion illyricum Horv. Fagetum subalpinum Horv. 

Acereto-Fraxinetum croaticum Horv. 

Querceto-Carpinetum croaticum Horv. 

Populetalia Alneto quercion roboris Horv. Querceto-Genistetum elatae Horv. 

Forest associations of willow trees and poplars not 

Populion albae Br.Bl. 

described 

ALNETEA 

Alnetalia glutinosae Alnion glutinosae Alnetum glutinosae-Carex brizoides Horv. 

GLUTINOSAE 

QUERCETO- Quercetalia roboris Quercion robis Querceto Castanetum croaticum Horv. 

ULICETEA sessiliflorae sessiliflorae Br.Bl. Fageto-Blechnetum Horv. 

Pinion heldreichii Pinetum Heldreichii Horv. 

Abieto-Blechnetum Horv. 

Aremonieto-piceetum Horv. 

VACCINIO Piceetalia Piceion exelsae Pawl. Piceetum croaticum subalpinum Horv. 

PICEETEA Piceetum omoricae Treg. 

Abieto-Piceetum calamagrostidis Horv. 

Pinion mughi Pawl. Pinetum mughi croaticum Horv. 

Class Order Union Forest association 

* No research was carried out on pine forests in Bosnia, but according to BECK (cit. HORV. 55) primarily floristic elements prevail in the referred 

forest association.


Table 1: Biodiversity in the main high forests 

Oak forests Beech forests 

Beech, Fir, 

Spruce forests 

Scotch and Black 

pine forests 

% 

Abies alba + + 40.4 0.8 

Pinus silvestris - + 0.6 19.2 

Picea abies - + 25.7 4.8 

Pinus nigra 0.7 + 0.2 59.4 

Pinus heldreichii - - + - 

Picea omorica Panč. - - + - 

Fagus silvatica 6.5 91.4 30.7 3.3 

Quercus pedunculata 0.3 - - - 

Quercus sessiliflora 76.2 1.6 0.2 10.6 

Quercus conferta 0.1 + + 0.1 

Quercus cerris 11.5 0.3 + + 

Quercus pubescens 0.1 - - - 

Acer pseudoplatanus 0.1 2.6 0.9 0.1 

Acer obtusatum 0.5 0.8 + 0.2 

Acer platanoides + 0.6 + - 

Fraxinus excelsior 0.1 0.4 0.1 - 

Fraxinus ornus 0.6 + - + 

Ulmus sp. - 0.2 0.4 + 

Carpinus betulus 1.7 1.3 + 0.5 

Ostrya carpinifolia + - + 0.1 

Carpinus orientalis + - + 0.1 

Tilia sp. 0.3 0.4 0.2 + 

Castanea vesca (sativa) + + - - 

Betula verucosa alba + 0.4 + 0.6 

Alnus glutinosa 0.1 + + + 

Alnus incana 0.1 + + - 

Acer heldreichii - + + - 

Juglans regia - + - - 

Salix sp. - + 0.1 - 

Populus sp. + + + - 

Other broad-leaved trees 1.0 - 0.5 0.3 

Afforestation to a grater scale began after the Second World War. In the period from 1945 

to 1992 about 200,000 ha were afforested, and now the oldest man made forests are about 

50 years old. Afforestation was carried out mainly on bare lands and on clear-cuts of 

coppice with ambition to obtain stands of high mixed forests. For afforestation the 

following tree species were utilised: Norway spruce (Picea abies L.), Scotch pine (Pinus 

silvestris L.), and Black pine (Pinus nigra Arn.). Some not native tree species were 

planted on a very small scale, e.g. European Larch (Larix decidua Mill.), Japanese Larch 

(Larix leptolepis Gord.), Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii Mirb.) and Eastern white 

pine (Pinus strobus L.).


Table 2: Growing stock (over 7 cm d.b.h.) 

Forest Surface Conifers Broad-leaved trees Total 

type ha m 3 /ha m 3 /ha m 3 /ha 

High forests 1.260,000 88 130 218 

Coppices 927,000 - 57 57 

Total 2.187,000 

The ratio of conifers to broad-leaved trees is 1 to 1.5. 

Table 3: The mean volume increment (over 7 cm d.b.h. - per ha) 

Conifers Broad-leaved trees Total 

m 3 /ha m 3 /ha m 3 /ha 

High forests 2.46 3.11 5.57 

Coppices - 1.98 1.98 

Total 2.46 5.09 - 

Due to absence of tending, and because some forests are still the remains of virgin forests 

- forests of virgin origin - trees in these forests are of poor quality. In the beech and oak 

high forests only 13% of the trees are of higher quality, and in mixed high forests of 

beech, spruce and fir, every third conifer tree and every sixth broad-leaved tree are of 

higher quality. 

Table 4: Allowable mean cutting per hectare 

Conifers Broad-leaved trees Total 

m 3 / ha / year m 3 / ha / year m 3 / ha / year 

High forests 2.16 3.47 5.63 

Coppices - 1.07 1.07 

Total 2.16 4.54 - 

Before the War of 1992, the annual felling was roughly 5.47 million m 3 of the growing 

stock (conifers 2.19 and broad-leaved trees 3.28 million m 3 annually). 

Before 1878 almost all forests in Bosnia and Herzegovina were natural-virgin forests. 

Nowadays there are no second growth forests, and in all types of forests we can find 

remains of former virgin forests (trees of worst quality). 

In all types of high forest the classical selection system management is applied (felling of 

a single selected tree), or the selection system management in small groups with natural 

regeneration is applied (Fenel System).


THE FUTURE GOALS IN FORESTRY 

The future goals in the forestry of the country are: 

1. To increase the growing stock from 266 m 3 /ha to 350 - 400 m 3 /ha. 

2. To increase the quality and value of forests by tending. 

3. To change the ratio of conifers to broad-leaved trees from 40%:60% to 60%:40% in 

high forests. This goal can be achieved only by tending in the first stage age. 

4. Natural regeneration in all high forests. 

5. The conversion of coppices into high forests by tending. 

6. The conversion of smaller sections of coppices into mixed stands of broad-leaved 

trees and conifers through afforestation. 

7. Afforestation of bare lands and the karst area. 

8. Increasing the multiple use of forests, especially the protective and recreational 

functions of forests. 

THE TASKS OF RESEARCH 

The Forestry Faculty and The Institute for Researches in Forestry and Wood Industry in 

Sarajevo are carrying out researches in forestry and wood industry. 

The spheres of investigations are: 

1. Dendrology 

2. Plant physiology 

3. Soil science 

4. Forest ecology and phytosociology 

5. Silviculture 

6. Forest mensuration, forest taxation and forest inventory 

7. Forest utilisation 

8. Forest protection. 

PROTECTED FORESTS AND FOREST RESERVES 

In Bosnia and Herzegovina there are many protected forests with diverse level of 

protection. Geographical location of the protected forests are shown in the Appendix A 

and B (Figure 4 and 5).


Table 5: Protected forests of Bosnia and Herzegovina 

Object 

No. 

Name of the object 

National parks 

Commune Surface (ha) 

1. N.P. »Sutjeska« Foča 17 250 

2. N.P. »Kozara« 

Virgin forest reserves 

Prijedor 3 375 

3. »Peručica« Foča 1 434 

4. »Janj« Šipovo 195 

5. »Lom« Bosan. Petrovac 295 

6. »Žuča-Ribnica« Kakanj 30 

7. »Plješevica« 

Forest reserves 

Bihać 50 

8. »Bukov do« Ljubinje 100 

9. »Mastna luka« Posušje 400 

10. »Omar« 

Special reserves 

a.) Forest on moor 

Skender Vakuf 97 

11. »Han Kram« Sokolac 5 

12. »Ðilda« Vareš 10 

13. »Zvijezda« Vareš 10 

b.) Reserves of Picea omorica Panæ. 

14. »Tovarnica« Višegrad 2 

15. »Karaula Stule« Višegrad 2 

16. »Božurevac« Višegrad 10 

17. »Veliki Stolac« Višegrad 10 

18. »Gostilja« Višegrad 50 

19. »Panjak« Rogatica 30 

20. »Novo Brdo« Rogatica 20 

21. »Pliština« Srebrenica 20 

22. »Strugovi« Srebrenica 30 

23. »Viogor« Čajniče 40 

24. »Sokolina« Foča 30 

Total Picea omorica Panæ. 

Parks - Forests 

244 

25. »Trebević« Sarajevo 1 000 

26. »Bašajkovac« Livno 10 

27. »Suvajsko Međugorje« Bos. Krupa 50 

28. »Kruščica« Travnik 50 

29. »Tisovac« Busovača 50 

30. »Bistričak« Zenica 30 

Total Parks-forests 

Natural Park 

1 190 

31. »Jahorina« Pale 2 000


Table 6: Reserves of Pinus heldreichii 

Name of the object Commune Surface (ha) 

»Vran« Prozor 65 

»Prenj« Konjic 40 

»Rujište Mostar 50 

»Čvrsnica« Posušje 50 

»Hranisava« Hadžići 50 

Table 7: Recapitulation 

Total reserves of Pinus heldreichii 255 

Name of the object 

Surface 

(ha) 

Share of total forest area 

(%) 

National Parks (without »Peručica«) 19,191 ha 0.71% 

Virgin reserves 2,004 ha 0.07% 

Forest reserves 597 ha 0.03% 

Special reserves 269 ha 0.01% 

Park Forests 1,190 ha 0.04% 

Natural parks 2,000 ha 0.07% 

Reserves of Pinus heldreichii 255 ha 0.01% 

Total 25,506 ha 0.94% 

Forest associations in the National Park »Kozara«, the surface of 3,375 ha, are: Sessile 

oak (Querceto-Carpinetum) and Beech (Fagetum). The Virgin forest »Peručica« (1,434 

ha) is located in the National Park »Sutjeska« (17,250 ha), the area with altitudes ranging 

from 500 m to 2387 m. Due to its great variance of bedrock and soil conditions, different 

forest associations developed here (more than twenty), ranging from Carpinetum 

orientalis to Pinetum mughi. In 1954 Prof. Leibundgut and myself measured perhaps the 

highest spruce in Europe located in the Virgin forest »Peručica«. The height was 64 m 

and the breast diameter 190 cm. 

In other virgin forests (»Janj«, »Lom« and »Žuča-Ribnica«) we find mixed forests of 

beech, spruce and fir with some maple (Acer sp.), elm (Ulmus sp.) and many other species 

of broad-leaved trees because they have similar geological and soil substrate (limestone 

and brown soils). 

Projection for new National Parks 

The Institute of Cultural, Historical and Natural Heritage Protection of Bosnia and 

Herzegovina in Sarajevo took the initiative to declare the National parks: 

1. The mountain region of Prenj-Čvrsnica-Čabulja in Herzegovina (the endemic 

center of the Prenj Mountain), and 

2. The mountain region of Treskavica-Bjelašnica-Igman in Bosnia near Sarajevo. 

The River Una valley in the west Bosnia should be declared a Nature Reserve.


Research in forest reserves 

On account of its great ecological differences in altitude (0 - 2387 m), in climate 

(continental, oceanic, mediterranean), in soils, etc., Bosnia and Herzegovina is classified 

into the following major regions where biological research is carried out: 

1. Illyric region (Western humid region) 

2. Moesiac region (Eastern arid region) 

3. Central European region (Northern part of Bosnia) 

4. Eumediterranean region (Evergreen region) 

5. Mediterranean mountain region 

In accordance with proposal of professor Dušan Mlinšek (in 1980) a network of plots will 

be established in these regions, with a minimum surface of 20 ha, and surrounded by a 

protection belt. A research in these plots will be carried out in the domain of: 

– the main ecological characteristics of plots (climate, soil, etc.), 

– the dynamic of forest population, fructification, regeneration, growing, 

– how the energy, biomass, water and minerals travel through the ecosystem, 

– the development in the past and in the future, 

– the structure and functions of flora and fauna, 

– what are the main impacts on the ecosystems, 

– research into the structure and dynamics of old growth forests in Bosnia and 

Herzegovina, 

– comparative researches into the patterns of natural disturbances and regeneration 

in old growth and management of natural forests, 

– natural regeneration and changing of tree species by natural regeneration. 

SUMMARY 

Bosnia and Herzegovina is situated in the north-west of the Balkan Peninsula. It is 

predominantly mountainous (5% flat lowlands, 24% hilly, 42% mountainous, and 29% 

karst region). High forests, coppices and bare-lands represent 53% of the total land 

surface. This area of forest landscape is covered by 46.9% of high forests, 34.3% of 

coppices, and 18.8% of bare lands. 

In the high forest main tree species are: oak, beech, silver fir, Norway spruce, and black 

and Scotch pine. In the coppices, beech and sessile oak are the main tree species. 

Approximately 90% of the forest landscape represents natural forest which has great 

diversity of tree species. Roughly only 10% of the forest landscape represents 

afforestation aged 50 years or less. 

In the high forests the growing stock (more than 7 cm d.b.h.) is approximately 218 m 3 /ha, 

and 50 m 3 /ha in the coppices. The mean volume increment is more or less 5.57 m 3 /ha 

annually in the high forests (2.46 m 3 /ha in conifer forests, 3.11 m 3 /ha in broad-leaved tree 

forests). In the high forests annual permissible cutting is 5.63 m 3 /ha (2.16 m 3 /ha in conifer 

forests, 3.47 m 3 /ha in broad-leaved tree forests). 

The single tree selection or the group selection system is applied in all types of high 

forests.


In the future the main goals are: 

– to exercise the same forest management system as it exists today, 

– to increase the growing stock and its quality through tending, 

– to practice natural regeneration in all high forests, 

– to convert the essential part of coppices into high forests through tending, 

– to extend the multiple use of the forests. 

The total surface of protected forests of all categories is approximately 25,500 ha (0.94% 

of the total forest area). 

In the next 10 years, the area of all protected reserves will be enlarged, especially in the 

mountain region Prenj-Čvrsnica-Čabula, which is the centre of the endemic tree species 

Pinus heldreichii. In addition to this the region of Igman-Bjelašnica near Sarajevo, and 

the river Una in the western part of Bosnia, will be enlarged. 

Contact address: 

Prof. Dr. Konrad Pintarić 

Prof. Dr. Vladimir Beus 

Prof. Dr. Faruk Mekić 

Ass. Sead Vojniković, BSc in For. 

Ass. Čemal Višnjić, BSc in For. 

Šumarski fakultet (Forestry Faculty) 

Zagrebačka 20 

71000 Sarajevo 

Bosnia and Herzegovina 

Tel.:++387-71-614-003, ++387-71-611-349; ++387-71-653-927 

Fax.:++387-71-611-349 

REFERENCES 

ALIFALFIĆ, F. (1965) Prašumski rezervati Peručica. Narodni šumar, sv. 7-8, p. 237-246, Sarajevo. 

DRINIĆ, P. (1965) Taksacioni elementi sastojina jele, smrče i bukve prašumskog tipa u Bosni. 

Radovi Poljoprivredno-šumskog tipa u Bosni. Radovi Poljoprivredno-šumarskog fakulteta Broj 

1 B, p. 107-160. 

DRINIĆ, P. (1957) Taksacioni elementi bukovih sastojina prašumskog tipa u Donjoj Drinjači. Radovi 

Poljoprivredno-šumarskog fakulteta, broj 1/B, p. 105-140, Sarajevo. 

ERAK, S. (1986) Utezanje prašumske jelovine iz Gospodarske jednice Vitoroga »Glamoč. 

Šumarstvo i prerada drveta, broj 7-9, p. 321.326, Sarajevo. 

FUKAREK, D. (1957) Prašumski rezervat »Peručica«, Narodni šumar, 10-12, p. 389-393, Sarajevo. 

FUKAREK, P. / ŠTEFANOVIĆ, V. (1958) Prašuma Peručica i njena vegetacija. Radovi Poljoprivrednošumarskog 

fakulteta, B Šumarstvo III/3, p. 93-146, Sarajevo. 

FUKAREK, P. (1962) Prašumski rezervat Peručica. Narodni šumar, sv. 10-12, Sarajevo.


FUKAREK, P. (1964) Prašuma Peručica nekad i danas (I), Narodni šumar, sv. 9-10, p. 433-456, 

Sarajevo. 

FUKAREK, P. (1964) a) Prašuma Peručica nekad i danas (II) Narodni šumar, sv. 1-2, p. 29-50 

Sarajevo. 

FUKAREK, P. (1970) Šumske zajednice prašumskog rezervata Peručica. Akademija nauke i 

umjetnosti BiH, Posebno izdanje XV, knjiga 4, p. 157-262, Sarajevo. 

FUKAREK, P. (1970) Južno evropske prašume i njihov značaj za nauku i praksu. Akademija nauke i 

umjetnosti BiH, Posebno izdanje, knjiga 4, p. 21-40, Sarjevo. 

FUKAREK, P. (1978) Zu den südeuropäischen Urwäldern. Allgemeine Forstzeitschrift, No 24, 

München. 

LEIBUNDGUT, H. (1982) Europäische Urwälder der Bergstufe. Haupt, Bern. 

LEIBUNDGUT, H. (1993) Europäische Urwälder, Haupt, Bern. 

MANUŠEVA, L. / ĆIRIĆ, M. (1969) On the special properties of humus in Virgin Forest soils of 

Bosnia and Herzegovina. Sulhurile muntilor Bucegi, p. 231-240, Bucarest. 

MAYER, H. (1992) Waldbau auf soziologisch-ökologischer Grundlage, IV Auflage, G. Fischer 

Verlag, Stuttgart, Jena, New York. 

PINTARIĆ, K. (1959) Urwald in Jugoslawien. Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Forstwesen, sv. 3, p. 1- 

6, Bern. 

PINTARIĆ, K. (1978) Urwald Peručica als natürliches Forschungslaboratorium. Allgemeine Forstzeitschrift, 

heft 24, p. 702-707, München. 

STEFANOVIĆ, V. (1970) Jedan pogled na recentnu sukcesiju bukovih-jelovih šuma prašumskog 

karaktera u Bosni. Radovi Akademije nauka i umjetnosti BiH. XV, knjiga 4, p. 141-150, 

Sarajevo. 

STEFANOVIĆ, V. (1988) Prašumski rezervati Jugoslavije, dragulji iskonske prirode. Biološki list, br. 

9-10, p. 1-5, Sarajevo.


Appendix A 

Figure 4: The geological locations of the protected forests 

2 

river Vrbas 

river Una 

27 

7 

BIHAĆ 

river Bosna 

BANJA LUKA 

10 

TUZLA 

5 

30 

ZENICA 

6 

12 

4 

28 

29 

11 

14 - 24 

SARAJEVO 

26 

river Drina 

31 

25 

9 

REGISTRED NATIONAL PARKS AND 

FOREST RESERVES IN BOSNIA 

AND HERZEGOVINA 

1 

3 

MOSTAR 

river Neretva 


1 - 2 

Virgin reserves 

3 - 7 

8 

8 - 10 Forest reserves 

Special reserves 

11 - 24 

Park forests 

25 - 30 

Natural parks 

31


Appendix B 

Figure 5: The enlargement of the protected forests and forest reserves in the next ten years 

river Vrbas 

4 

river Bosna 

river Una 

BIHAĆ 

17 

BANJA LUKA 

13 

16 

TUZLA 

12 

14 

11 

15 

ZENICA 

8 

9 

10 

6 

7 

SARAJEVO 

2 

5 

1 

1 

river Drina 

PROJECTED EXTENSION OF 

PROTECTED FOREST ECOSYSTEMS 

IN BOSNIA AND HERCEGOVINA 

3 


Enlarged National parks 

1 - 2 

3 - 4 

5 - 18 

river Neretva 

MOSTAR 

Natural parks 

river 

Neretva 

18

COST Action E4: Forest Reserves Research Network • • • Proceedings of the Invited Lecturers' Reports ⁄ p. 17 - 24 

ABSTRACT 

THE FORESTS OF CROATIA – COUNTRY REPORT 

by Slavko MATIĆ * 

The Republic of Croatia is one of the countries in which the protection of nature and the 

preservation of environment has a tradition of several centuries. Although systematic activities 

to this end began in the middle of the 19th century, we should point out that the oldest 

regulations on forest management, prescribing treatments aimed at the protection and 

preservation of nature, date back to the 18th century. 

Legal acts and magazine articles make it possible for us to trace the history of nature 

protection and environment conservation through the history of forestry. Forestry and forest 

science in Croatia, whose continuous development is over 225 years long, was born out of 

justifiable fear that chaotic and unsystematic treatment of forests at that time would lead to 

their destruction and disappearance. As a result, about 95% of the forests were developed by 

natural regeneration. The preservation of their natural structure and biodiversity, sustainability 

and natural regeneration are fundamental postulates of past, present and future management. 

The proclamation of first protected nature areas and facilities in Croatia was preceded both by 

the enactment of various acts, regulations and laws, and by the publishing activity of Croatian 

naturalists. 

In Croatia there are ten categories of nature protection. The Law prescribes activities to be 

carried out in each of these categories, management practices, proclamation of new categories, 

methods of protection, compensation for damage, surveillance and punitive measures. 


Forests and forest land in Croatia covers 2.485,300 ha, which is 43.5% of the total area. 

Forests in their various silvicultural forms take up 83.6%, or 2.078,00 ha, and productive and 

unproductive forest land accounts for 16.4% or 406,000 ha. On average, there is 0.51 ha of 

forests per capita. 

Forests in Croatia inhabit three zones with characteristic ecological and vegetational features. 

These are: the zone of lowland forests covering 910,000 ha in total and having a growing 

stock of 150 million m 3 , the zone of hills and mountains with an area of 775,200 ha, and a 

growing stock of 100 million m 3 , and the Mediterranean or sub-Mediterranean zone with an 

* Prof. Dr. S.M., Faculty of Forestry, University of Zagreb, Svetošimunska 25, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia

18 

The Forests of Croatia - Country Report 

area of 800,100 ha and a growing stock of 80 million m 3 . In terms of ownership, 82% of the 

forests are state-owned, and only 18% are privately-owned. 

In Croatia, forests have mostly developed with natural regeneration. Of the total forest area, 

only about 5%, or 100,000 ha, are covered with broadleaves and conifer cultures and 

plantations. The rest of the forests are natural. About 1.200,000 ha, or 58%, are high 

silvicultural forms, about 500,000 ha, or 24%, are low silvicultural forms or coppices, and 

about 300,000 ha, or 13%, are various degraded stages (maquis, garrigues, brushwood, 

thickets). 

About 54% of the forest area are continental forests on altitudes ranging between 100 and 

1,600 metres above sea level. The following belts can be distinguished: the belt of oak forests, 

the belt of beech and fir forests, the belt of sub-Alpine beech, and the belt of Mugho pine. The 

Mediterranean belt is divided into the zone belonging to holm oak and Aleppo pine (EU- 

Mediterranean) and the belt with pubescent oak and black pine (sub-Mediterranean). 

The total growing stock in the forests of Croatia is 324.257,000 m 3 , the annual increment is 

9.643,000 m 3 , and the felling quantity is 5.354,000 m 3 , which is 55% of the total annual 

increment. 

Of the total growing stock, beech takes up 36%, or 89.140,490 m 3 , pedunculate oak 16%, or 

40.541,780 m 3 , European fir 12%, or 30.975,420 m 3 , sessile oak takes up 9%, or 

22.976,488 m 3 , other hard broadleaves 18%, or 45.076,990 m 3 , other soft broadleaves 4%, or 

10.245,387 m 3 , and other conifers 5%, or 11.869,893 m 3 . 

Over 225 years of forestry tradition in Croatia is well documented. The first forests stations 

were established as early as in 1769, at the same time as in some central European countries. 

The Forest Association, founded in 1846, has been working continuously up to present time. 

The first forestry teaching facility was established in Križevci in 1860, while a specialized 

magazine "Journal of Forestry" (Šumarski list) saw its first publication in 1877. University 

forestry education began in Zagreb in 1898 in the form of Forest Academy, which was 

transformed into Faculty of Agriculture and Forestry in 1919. Since 1960 it has been an 

independent Faculty of Forestry. The scientific journal of the Forestry Faculty, called "Forest 

Experiments" (Glasnik za šumske pokuse), first published in 1926, has been coming out 

regularly up to now. Another important year is 1996, when the Academy of Forest Science 

was established, gathering top scientists from the field of forestry. 

The distinctive feature of Croatian forestry is the management of natural forests and the use of 

natural regeneration as a basic method of forest regeneration. The reason why Croatian forests 

have retained their natural structure lies in natural or artificial regeneration, strict adherence to 

the principles of natural regeneration, and the abolishment of clear cutting as a method of 

forest regeneration. The forests are characterized with factors such as stability, productivity 

and biodiversity, which are conducive to sustainable management and natural regeneration. 

This laudable state of Croatian forestry is due primarily to the renowned Zagreb School of 

Silviculture, which has developed in the course of long forestry history and tradition. Its basic 

postulates are: 

– management with natural forests, 

– preservation of natural structure and diversity, 

– the use of natural regeneration as a regeneration method,


– maintenance of stability, diversity, natural structure and good market and non-market 

values, 

– using forests and forestry in the light of environmental protection. 

The first scientific research into the forests took place in the middle of last century, and have 

continued with unabated intensity until present time. The problems of regenerating and 

tending natural forests, and regenerating desiccated, degraded and endangered forest are in the 

focus of scientific research by the scientists of the Faculty of Forestry in Zagreb, and the 

Forestry Institute in Jastrebarsko. 

THE HISTORY OF NATURE RESERVES IN CROATIA 

The Republic of Croatia is one of the countries in which the protection of nature and the 

preservation of environment has a tradition of several centuries. Although systematic activities 

to this end began in the middle of the 19th century, we should point out that the oldest 

regulations on forest management, prescribing treatments aimed at the protection and 

preservation of nature, date back to the 18th century. 

Legal acts and magazine articles make it possible for us to trace the history of nature 

protection and environment conservation through the history of forestry. Forestry and forest 

science in Croatia, whose continuous development is over 225 years long, was born out of 

justifiable fear that chaotic and unsystematic treatment of forests at that time would lead to 

their destruction and disappearance. As a result, about 95% of the forests were developed by 

natural regeneration. The preservation of their natural structure and biodiversity, sustainability 

and natural regeneration are fundamental postulates of past, present and future management. 

The proclamation of first protected nature areas and facilities in Croatia was preceded both by 

the enactment of various acts, regulations and laws, and by the publishing activity of Croatian 

naturalists. 

One of the more important events took place in 1769, when a legal act on forest management 

was passed containing regulations on forest protection and conservation. In 1843, the Hunting 

Act prescribed the protection of birds and rare game species. The Forest Act from 1930 listed 

the procedures for proclaiming protected nature facilities, and prescribed the maintenance of 

nature monuments and particularities of plant and animal world. A regulation on national 

parks was passed in 1938. The Institute for the Protection of Natural Rarities was founded in 

1946, and the Law on the protection of cultural monuments and rare natural features was 

passed. The basic legal acts regulating the protection of nature and environment today are: 

The Constitution of the Republic of Croatia, the Forest Act, the Act on Area Planning, the 

Law on Nature Protection, and the Law on Ratification of the Convention on the Protection of 

World Cultural and Natural Heritage. 

Croatian naturalists have published numerous articles on the protection of nature in various 

magazines, some of which have a century-long tradition, and are among the oldest dealing 

with this problem matter. Journal of Forestry (Šumarski list 1877), Journal of the Croatian 

Natural Scientists' Association (Glasnik Horvatskoga naravoslovnoga društva 1886), Hunting 

and Fishing News (Lovačko-ribarski viestnik 1892), The Croatian Mountaineer (Hrvatski 

planinar 1898), Nature (Priroda 1911), Forest Experiments (Glasnik za šumske pokuse 1926), 

and Nature Conservation (Zaštita prirode 1938).

20 


Today, 746 facilities in Croatia are under protection, of which 322 are protected areas 

covering 447,197.17 ha, or 7.3% of the total surface area of the Republic. Protected facilities 

are divided into ten protective categories. Their number and area are shown in Table 1. 

Table 1: Protected categories in the Republic of Croatia 

Category Number Area (ha) 

Strict reserves 2 2,395.35 

National parks 7 69,420.00 

Nature parks 6 317,502.00 

Special reserves 70 (forests: 32) 31,680.09 

Park forests 23 7,659.91 

Significant landscapes 28 17,544.52 

Natural monuments 72 82.87 

Architectural park monuments 114 912.43 

Animal species 380 - 

Plant species 44 - 

Total 746 447,197.17 

Apart from legally protected natural facilities, there is also a category of protective forests 

covering an area of 99,412.00 ha. These forests are excluded from regular management due to 

their multipurpose protective functions. They provide protection against erosions, avalanches, 

and winds, as well as protection of forest roads, special facilities or areas, etc. 

CLASSIFICATION OF FOREST PROTECTION AREAS 

In Croatia there are ten categories of nature protection. The Law prescribes activities to be 

carried out in each of these categories, management practices, proclamation of new categories, 

methods of protection, compensation for damage, surveillance and punitive measures. 

Strict reserves are areas in which nature is either unaltered or only slightly altered by human 

activity. All activities and practices of harmful nature are strictly prohibited. Strict reserves in 

Croatia are Hajdučki and Rožanski kukovi, and Bijele and Samarske stijene. 

National parks are large areas with special natural, scientific, educational, aesthetic, tourist and 

recreational values, and comprise one or more preserved or slightly altered ecosystems. 

Activities which do not endanger authentic plant and animal world, those that do not harm 

hydrographic, geomorphological, geological, and landscape values, and those which maintain 

or establish natural balance are allowed. There are 7 national parks in Croatia: the Plitvice 

Lakes (Plitvička jezera), Paklenica, Risnjak, the Island of Mljet, the Kornati Archipelago, the 

Brijuni Islands, and the River Krka. The first national park, proclaimed in 1949, was the 

Plitvice Lakes. The Society for the Enhancement of the Beauty of Plitvice Lakes was founded 

in 1893, and proposed that Plitvice Lakes be proclaimed a national park as early as in 1914. 

Nature park is a spacious uncultivated or partly cultivated area with distinct ecological, 

aesthetic, tourist and recreational values. Activities which do not endanger the basic features 

and functions of the park are allowed. The 6 nature parks in Croatia are: Kopački rit,


Medvednica, Velebit, Biokovo, Telašćica, and Lonjsko polje. Mount Velebit is the most 

important mountain in Croatia in terms of its relief and vegetation. The UNESCO proclaimed 

Mount Velebit a world biosphere reserve in 1978. 

Park forest is a natural or planted forest of high landscape value intended for rest and 

recreation. Activities concerned with its conservation and regulation are allowed. 

Significant landscape is a natural or cultivated area of high aesthetic or cultural-historical 

values, or an area featuring a characteristic landscape. Activities harming the features for 

which the area was proclaimed a significant landscape are not allowed. 

Monument of nature is an individual item or a collection of items in their authentic form 

belonging to live or still nature having scientific, aesthetic or cultural-historical value. 

Architectural park monument is a specially designed area (park, botanical garden, arboretum, 

city park, avenue, an individual or a group of trees, and other forms of garden and park 

design) of aesthetic, stylistic, artistic, cultural-historical or scientific value. 

Endangered or rare plant and animal species are protected by the State. All activities which 

might disturb or interfere with the natural life and development of protected species are 

forbidden. 

Special reserve is an area with one or more distinct nature elements (plant and animal species, 

their communities, relief, water), which have scientific importance and purpose. Special 

reserves can include: forest vegetation, and botanical, zoological, geological and other 

features. Activities which might harm the features for which an area was proclaimed a special 

reserve are not allowed. There are 70 special reserves in all, of which 32 are the reserves of 

forest vegetation. (See Table 2 on the next page.) 

The best preserved forests in Croatia are virgin forests of beech and fir (Abieti Fagetum 

illyricum Hor. 1938), occurring in several places in the Dinaric range. The best known are 

Čorkova uvala in the National Park of Plitvice Lakes, Devčića tavani, Štirovača, and Klepina 

duliba in north Velebit, Javorov kal in the National Park of Risnjak, and Velika Plješivica on 

the border with Bosnia and Herzegovina. Of lowland forests, a virgin forest of pedunculate 

oak and common hornbeam (Carpino betuli Quercetum roboris Rauš 1971), and a Slavonian 

forest of pedunculate oak and greenweed with remote sedge (Genisto elatae Quercetum 

roboris caricetosum remotae Ht. 1938) are protected in Prašnik near Okučani. Virgin forests 

of beech inhabit the localities of Ramino korito, on south Velebit and in Muški bunar on 

Psunj. These are stands of mountain forests of beech and mountain forests of beech with 

sessile oak (Lamio orvale Fagetum sylvaticae Ht. 1938).

22 

Table 2: Special reserves of forest vegetation in Croatia 


Name of forest reserve Basic features Area (ha) 

Velika Plješivica-Drenovača Beech and fir forest (virgin f.) 156.84 

Velika Plješivica-Javornik-Tisov vrh Beech and fir forest (virgin f.) 122.50 

Muški bunar Beech and sessile oak stand on Psunj (virgin f.) 

Pedunculate oak and common hornbeam stand 

58.67 

Prašnik 

and pedunculate oak with greenweed (virgin f.) 

Beech and fir stand in the National Park Plitvice 

58.00 

Čorkova uvala 

Lakes (virgin f.) 

Pedunculate oak and common hornbeam stand 

75.00 

Stupnički lug-Čret 

with beech (secondary virgin f.) 

18.00 

Štirovača-Klepina duliba Beech and fir forest (secondary virgin f.) 118.50 

Lokrum-Dubrovnik Stand of holm oak and maquis with Aleppo pine 72.37 

Dundo Holm oak stand on Island Rab 106.00 

Bliznec-Šumarev grob Beech and fir stand on Medvednica 

Thermophilous stand of pubescent oak and black 

175.73 

Gračec-Lukovica-Rebar 

hornbeam on Medvednica 

23.41 

Mikulić potok-Vrabečka gora Beech stand on Medvednica 90.93 

Pušinjak-Gorščica Beech stand on Medvednica 189.79 

Rauchova lugarnica-Desna trnava Beech and fir stand on Medvednica 101.01 

Tusti vrh-Kremenjak Beech and sessile oak stand on Medvednica 20.00 

Babji zub-Ponikve Sessile oak and beech stand on Medvednica 148.60 

Markovčak-Bistra Beech and fir stand on Medvednica 

Pedunculate oak and narrow-leaved ash stand in 

250.24 

Motovunska šuma 

the lower course of River Mirna in Istria 

Beech and fir stand and fir stand on stone blocks 

281.42 

Debela lipa-Vila rebar 

at Lokve, Gorski kotar 

Pubescent oak and white hornbeam stand above 

178.55 

Kontija 

the Limski Fjord in Istria 

39.88 

Crni jarci Black alder stand near Kalinovac 132.71 

Velika dolina Holm oak stand in National Park Mljet 15.00 

Sekulinačke Beech stand on Papuk 11.00 

Glavotok Holm oak stand on island Krk 

Beech stand and sessile oak and common 

1.00 

Dugačko brdo 

hornbeam on Bilogora 

Pedunculate oak and hornbeam stand, 

pedunculate oak with greenweed and remote 

10.91 

Lože 

sedge stand, and pedunculate oak with 

greenweed and Acer tataricum near Otok 

110.41 

Japetić Beech stand 

Stand of pedunculate oak and common hornbeam 

28.80 

Radiševo 

with beech near Vrbanja 

4.10 

Novakuša Pedunculate oak and hornbeam stand 

Pedunculate oak and hornbeam stand and black 

2.28 

Česma 

alder stand 

Pedunculate oak and hornbeam stand, 

pedunculate oak with greenweed and remote 

48.53 

Varoški lug 

sedge stand within a special zoological reserve 

Varoški lug 

Alluvial forests of willow and poplar on 

91.00 

Vukovarske dunavske ade 

Danubian islets near Vukovar 

115.00


The total area of forest vegetation reserves is 2,856.18 ha. In the lowland belt of the 

continental region (Table 3) there are 10 reserves covering an area of 861.45 ha. These are 

primarily the reserves of renowned forests of Slavonian pedunculate oak (Quercus robur ssp. 

slavonica) and one reserve of an alluvial forest of poplars and willows on Danubian islets near 

Vukovar. The reserve of Prašnik deserves special mention. The oak trees there are between 

250 and 300 years old, their breast diameters range from 70 to 200 cm, while in height they 

reach some 36 metres. The latest measurements revealed a total of 993 old oak trees with 

wood volume of about 15,000 m 3 . The wood volume of some samples exceed 50 m 3 . 

Table 3: Special reserves of forest vegetation with reference to altitudinal belts 

Height belt (altitude) Number of reserves Area (ha) % 

Lowland (< 130 m) 10 861.45 30.2 

Hilly (130–400 m) 1 23.41 0.8 

Low mountains (400–700 m) 8 808.94 28.3 

Mountains (700–1,200 m) 9 928.13 32.5 

Mediterranean region 5 234.25 8.2 

Total 32 2,856.18 100.0 

In the belt of low mountains there are 8 reserves of forest vegetation, whose total area is 

808.94 ha. The reserve of Muški Bunar on Psunj is an example of 300-year-old virgin forests 

of beech, and beech and sessile oak. Beech trees reach some 40 m in height, with breast 

diameters of up to 200 cm. Wood volume per hectare is over 800 m 3 . 

The Čorkova uvala virgin forest is an example of beech and fir. According to the latest 

mensuration, this stand has 439 trees per hectare, a basal area of 52.38 m 2 /ha, and wood 

volume of 922.71 m 3 /ha. 

There are 5 special reserves of forest vegetation in the Mediterranean region, of which Dundo 

on the Island of Rab deserves special mention, as it is one of the rare preserved forests of 

holm oak in the Mediterranean. 

REFERENCES 

MATIĆ, S. / MEŠTROVIĆ, Š. / VUKELIĆ, J. (1997) Gospodarenje šumama i šumskim prostorom na 

području Grada Zagreba i Zagrebačke županije. Šumarski fakultet Sveučilišta u Zagrebu, 

213 pp., Zagreb. 

MATIĆ, S. / PRPIĆ, B. / RAUŠ, Ð. / VRANKOVIĆ, A. / SELETKOVIĆ, Z. (1979) Ekološko-uzgojne osobine 

specijalnih rezervata šumske vegetacije Prašnik i Muški bunar u Slavoniji. In: Rauš, Ð. (ed.), 

Drugi kongres ekologa Jugoslavije, Savez društava ekologa Jugoslavije, 767-823, Zadar- 

Plitvice. 

PRPIĆ, B. (1972) Neke značajke prašume Čorkova uvala. Šum. list 9-10: 325-333.

24 


PRPIĆ, B. (1979) Struktura i funkcioniranje prašume bukve i jele (Abieti-Fagetum illyricum Horv. 

1938) u dinaridima Hrvatske. In: Rauš, Ð. (ed.), Drugi kongres ekologa Jugoslavije, Savez 

društava ekologa Jugoslavije, 899-928, Zadar-Plitvice. 

PRPIĆ, B. / SELETKOVIĆ, Z. (1996) Istraživanja u hrvatskim prašumama i korišćenje rezultata u 

postupku s prirodnom šumom. In: Mayer, B. (ed.), Unapređenje proizvodnje biomase šumskih 

ekosustava, Šumarski fakultet Sveučilišta u Zagrebu & Šumarski institut, Jastrebarsko, 97-103, 

Zagreb. 

RAUŠ, Ð. / MEŠTROVIĆ, Š. / TRINAJSTIĆ, I. / VUKELIĆ, J. / ŠPANJOL, Ž. (1992) Zaštićeni prirodni 

objekti u hrvatskih šumama. In: Rauš, Ð. (ed.), Šume u Hrvatskoj/Forests of Croatia, Šumarski 

fakultet Sveučilišta u Zagrebu & Hrvatske šume, p.o. Zagreb, 197-222, Zagreb. 

ŠPANJOL, Ž. (1994) Problematika nacionalnih parkova u svijetu i Republici Hrvatskoj. Glas. šum. 

pokuse 30: 61-94. 

Zakon o zaštiti prirode. Narodne novine 30/94.

COST Action E4: Forest Reserves Research Network • • Proceedings of the Invited Lecturers' Reports ⁄ p. 25 - 44 

ABSTRACT 

FOREST RESERVE RESEARCH NETWORK 

The Czech Republic Country Report 

by Libor Hort * , Vladimír Tesař ** , Tomáš Vrška *** 

This report gives a view of the state of the establishing of forest reserves, their 

conservation and their use in the forest research. The chapter "Forest Condition" contains 

a brief view of the state of the forests in the Czech Republic. The text is accompanied by 

tables and Figures. The chapter "History of the Establishment of Nature Reserves" 

summarizes the development of this topic from the establishing of the first forest reserve 

(in 1838) until now. The following chapter specifies the conditions of the legal protection 

of natural forests in the Czech Republic. The following two chapters briefly summarize 

the development and the present state of the research of forest reserves in the Czech 

Republic. The most extensive and comprehensive work on this theme was done by eng. 

Eduard PRÙŠA, CSc., who carried out a detailed survey in 13 of the best preserved 

reserves. The recent project "The Study of Dynamics of Virgin Forest Reserves in the 

Czech Republic" (the responsible chief manager Dr. eng. Tomáš VRŠKA) follows up this 

survey. The chapter "References" gives a view of the most important works on natural 

forest research in the Czech Republic. 

FOREST CONDITION 

(Extracted from the Report on Forestry of the Czech Republic, by December 31,1996 - 

Ministry of Agriculture of the Czech Republic, Prague 1997, 162 pp.) 

Since 1790 when the first data was recorded, the forest area on the territory of our state 

has increased by 657,000 ha and the forest cover has increased from 25% to 33%. In the 

last years this area has increased merely slightly – by 2,000 ha in five years – and made 

up in total 2,631 ha in 1996. The additions only closely surpassed the losses. At present, 

there is 0.25 ha of forest land per capita. In 1996, high forest covered 99.9% and coppice 

* L.H., BSc., Agency for Nature and Landscape Protection of the Czech Republic, Lidická 25/27, 

657 20 Brno, Czech Republic 

** Prof.Dr. V.T., The Mendel University for Forestry and Agriculture, The Faculty of Forestry and Wood 

Technology, Department of Silviculture, Zemědělská 3, 613 00 Brno, Czech Republic 

*** Dr. T.V., Podyjí National Park, Na Vyhlídce 5, 671 03 Znojmo, Czech Republic

26 Forest Reserves Research Network - The Czech Republic Country Report 

only 0.1%. Since 1950 the share of non-coniferous tree species has increased from 12.5% 

to 20.8% in 1990, and to 21.6% in 1996. Since 1920, the average rotation period has 

increased until the present by more than 20 years, and since 1950 by 13 years to the 

present 114.6 years (commercial forest 111.2 years, protection forest 155.0 years, forest 

of special purpose 116.6 years). The share of age classes I-III is lower than the calculated 

standard. The share of stands older than 80 years continues to increase. Above all, this 

development is a consequence of a high share of incidental fellings without subsequent 

afforestation obligation. The development of growing stock volumes is favourable. In 

1996, growing stock increased at 600 million m 3 (the figures are given in m 3 under bark). 

Total average increment in the mentioned year was 16.5 million m 3 (6.4 m 3 /ha) and the 

overall current addition was 18.0 million m 3 (7.0 m 3 /ha). Thus fellings were 83% of total 

average increment and 76% of total current increment. This means that growing stock will 

further increase. 

See Tables 1-16 and Figures 1-10. 

Table 1: Forest land area in the Czech Republic 

Year 1920 1930 1945 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 1996 

Area 1,000 ha 2369 2354 2420 2479 2574 2606 2623 2629 2631 

Figure 1: Forest land area in the Czech Republic 

2.7 

2.6 

2.5 

M ha 

2.4 

2.3 

2.2 

1920 1930 1945 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 1996 

Table 2: Forest coverage in the Czech Republic 

Czech Kingdom Czech Republic 

Year 1790 1865 1910 1990 1996 

Forest coverage 25.0 % 28.0 % 30.0 % 33.3 % 33.3 %


% 

Figure 2: Forest coverage in the Czech Republic 

35 

30 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

0 

1790 1865 1910 1990 1996 

Table 3: Species composition of forests in the Czech Republic 

Species 1950 1) 

Year 

1970 1980 1990 1996 

area of timber land in ha / % 

Spruce 60.0 55.6 55.7 54.7 54.6 

Fir 2.9 2.1 1.7 1.1 0.9 

Pine 21.2 19.2 18.3 17.8 17.7 

Larch 1.5 2.2 2.7 3.2 3.5 

Other coniferous 0.2 0.6 0.8 0.8 0.2 

Oak 3.6 5.5 5.7 6.0 6.2 

Beech 4.5 5.0 5.3 5.4 5.7 

Birch - 2.6 2.5 2.9 2.9 

Other non-coniferous 4.4 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.8 

Coniferous 85.8 79.7 79.2 77.6 76.9 

Non-coniferous 12.5 19.6 20.0 20.8 21.6 

Total without 

unstocked areas 

98.3 99.3 99.2 98.4 98.5 

1) Note: High forest available for wood supply only (including forests smaller than 10 ha in size). Birch has been 

included into soft non-coniferous and is mentioned as one of the other non-coniferous species.


Table 4: Natural and current composition of forests in the Czech Republic - % 

Composition Natural Current 

Spruce - (SP) 11.2 55.4 

Fir - (FR) 19.8 1.0 

Pine - (PN) 3.4 18.0 

Larch - (LA) 0.0 3.6 

Other coniferous 0.3 0.2 

Total coniferous 34.7 78.1 

Oak 19.4 6.3 

Beech - (BE) 40.2 5.8 

Hornbeam - (HB) 1.6 1.2 

Ash 0.6 1.0 

Maple - (MP) 0.7 0.8 

Elm 0.3 0.0 

Birch - (BI) 0.8 3.0 

Linden - (LI) 0.8 0.9 

Alder - (AL) 0.6 1.4 

Other non-coniferous. 0.3 1.5 

Total non-coniferous 65.3 21.6 

Note: Temporary unstocked area is included into species composition for giving comparison of 

natural and current conditions. 

Figure 3: Natural and current composition of forests in the Czech Republic - % 

60 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

SP FR PN LA conif. 

other 

natural 

current 

OAK BE HB ASH MP ELM BI LI AL non-conif. 

other


Table 5: Rotation period in forests of the Czech Republic 

Year 

1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 1996 

Rotation period, years 

93.4 92.5 95.4 101.1 101.2 102.6 108.1 112.4 114.6 

Table 6: Age categories in forests of the Czech Republic 

Age category (years) 

Unstocked I II III IV V VI VII 

area 1-20 21-40 41-60 61-80 81-100 101-120 121 + 

Year % of timber land 

1920 1 23 24 22 17 10 3 0 

1930 2 21 21 21 19 11 5 0 

1950 2 18 21 21 19 12 7 0 

1960 1 17 21 20 19 13 6 3 

1970 1 17 20 19 20 13 7 3 

1980 1 17 15 20 20 15 8 4 

1990 1.5 16.1 14.7 19.4 18.9 16.8 8.2 4.4 

1996 1.5 16.2 15.5 16.5 18.5 17.6 9.3 4.9 

Normality - 17.9 17.9 17.7 17.3 15.9 9.4 3.9 

Note: Data before 1990 cannot be specified in decimals. 

Table 7: Age structure of forest stands in the Czech Republic 

Year 

1950 1) 

1960 1970 1980 1990 1996 

Age range forest stand area, ha 

0 - unstocked area 64 281 23 335 18 627 19 796 40 562 38 086 

1 - 40 948 040 941 218 940 665 834 913 791 948 820 377 

41 - 80 945 123 951 215 999 090 1 022 009 975 060 904 418 

81 - 120 475 760 474 077 527 635 593 707 662 853 695 406 

121 + --- 72 914 81 291 101 641 112 357 126 343 

1) Note: Including non-forest land to be afforested and forests not available for wood supply. Forest stands older 

than 120 years were not separated and are included into age category of 81-120 years. 

Unstocked area on non-forest land was 21,084 ha.


Table 8: Changes in forest categories in the Czech Republic 

Forest category 

Year commercial forest protection forest special purpose forest 

1980 78.2 % 4.0 % 17.8 % 

1985 68.2 % 3.1 % 28.7 % 

1990 58.4 % 2.5 % 39.1 % 

1996 61.3 % 2.9 % 35.8 % 

Figure 4: Changes in forest categories in the Czech Republic 

% 

80 

70 

60 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

1980 1985 1990 1996 

Table 9: Silvicultural systems in the Czech Republic 

commercial forest 

protection forest % 

special purpose forest 

Forest managed clear-cutting or shelter-wood system Selection forest 

high coppice coppice in copp. with high coppice in 

conversion standards conversion 

Year % of forest land area 

1900 89.5 4.1 2.6 3.8 

1910 89.6 3.7 2.0 4.7 

1930 92.6 3.8 0.1 2.3 1.1 0.1 

% of forest stand area 

1950 96.8 0.8 2.4 ** - - 

1960 96.6 3.4 ** - - 

1970* 97.3 0.1 2.6 ** - - 

1980 98.8 1.2 ** - - 

1990 99.7 0.3 ** - - 

1996 99.9 0.1 ** - - 

Note: * Forest available for wood supply only. 

** Between 1950 and 1977, the upper and lower storeys of the coppice-with-standards forest were 

recorded separately. Since 1978, the coppice and coppice-with-standards forests with a sufficient number 

of trees of good quality are included in high forests.


Table 10: Regeneration of forest in the Czech Republic 

Method of 

regeneration: 

Regeneration, ha 

1980 1985 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 

artificial 26,939 33,555 33,615 31,516 29,600 27,698 26,897 30,128 28,426 

of which repeated 6,750 9,569 9,635 12,050 12,702 12,994 14,448 12,760 * 

natural regeneration 999 594 908 557 575 697 818 1,163 1,898 

Total 27,938 34,149 34,523 32,073 30,175 28,395 27,715 31,291 30,324 

* Note: Data not recorded 

Figure 5: Regeneration of forest in the Czech Republic 

1,000ha 

35 

30 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

0 

1980 1985 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 

artifical of which repeated natural regeneration Total 

Figure 6: Area of natural regeneration in the Czech Republic 

ha 

2000 

1500 

1000 

500 

0 

Area of natural regeneration 

1980 1985 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996


Table 11: Thinnings and cleanings 

Thinnings Cleanings Total 

Year 1,000 ha 

1980 92.7 53.7 146.4 

1985 34.9 55.2 90.1 

1990 68.8 51.0 119.8 

1991 93.5 52.6 146.1 

1992 92.9 44.7 137.6 

1993 53.2 34.2 87.4 

1994 74.3 43.0 117.3 

1995 111.4 44.8 156.2 

1996 118.6 46.0 164.6 

Figure 7: Thinnings and cleanings 

1,000 ha 

180 

160 

140 

120 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

0 

1980 1985 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 

Thinnings 

Cleanings 

Total


Table 12: Total annual fellings 

Fellings 1985 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 

coniferous mill. 12.82 12.17 9.51 8.70 9.69 11.16 11.31 11.26 

non-conif. m 3 

1.09 1.16 1.24 1.15 0.72 0.79 1.06 1.32 

total u.b. 13.91 13.33 10.75 9.85 10.41 11.95 12.37 12.58 

per capita m 3 

1.34 1.29 1.04 0.95 1.01 1.16 1.20 1.22 

per 1 ha of for. u.b. 5.29 5.07 4.09 3.75 3.96 4.54 4.70 4.78 

Figure 8: Total annual fellings 

M m 3 

14 

12 

10 

8 

6 

4 

2 

0 

1985 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 

coniferous 

non-conif.


Table 13: Mean current total increments 

Increment 1950* 1970 1980 1990 1996 

mill. m 3 u.b 

total current annual 9.2 14.8 17.1 17 18 

m 3 u.b. per 1 ha of the timber land 

total current annual 3.8 5.8 6.7 6.6 7.0 

* Note: Including forests under 10 ha of size, forests not available for wood supply and afforested 

non-forest land. 

Figure 9: Mean current total increments 

m 3 u.b. per ha 

7 

6 

5 

4 

3 

2 

1 

0 

1950* 1970 1980 1990 1996 

total current annual


Table 14: Salvage fellings by damaging agents 

Abiotic Air Pollution Insects Others Total 

Year mill.m 3 

1963 0.7 0.1 0.2 0.1 1.1 

1964 0.6 0.1 0.3 0.2 1.2 

1965 1.5 0.2 0.4 0.1 2.2 

1966 1.7 0.2 0.3 0.1 2.3 

1967 5.1 0.2 0.4 0.1 5.8 

1968 2.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 2.9 

1969 1.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 1.9 

1970 2.4 0.1 0.2 0.1 2.8 

1971 1.3 0.1 0.3 0.2 1.9 

1972 2.1 0.2 0.3 0.2 2.8 

1973 1.1 0.1 0.4 0.2 1.8 

1974 2.6 0.2 0.4 0.2 3.4 

1975 2.6 0.2 0.4 0.3 3.5 

1976 5.6 0.1 0.4 0.3 6.4 

1977 2.5 0.2 0.5 0.4 3.6 

1978 2.2 0.3 0.4 0.3 3.2 

1979 3.3 0.9 0.3 0.4 4.9 

1980 5.1 1.1 0.3 0.3 6.8 

1981 3.6 1.0 0.3 1.2 6.1 

1982 2.9 0.9 0.4 0.2 4.4 

1983 3.3 0.7 1.2 0.3 5.5 

1984 5.9 0.6 1.6 0.6 8.5 

1985 7.5 0.5 0.8 2.3 11.1 

1986 5.2 0.5 1.1 0.4 7.2 

1987 4.0 0.6 1.1 0.4 6.1 

1988 3.4 0.6 0.9 0.4 5.3 

1989 3.2 0.5 0.3 0.3 4.3 

1990 8.6 0.3 0.4 0.3 9.5 

1991 4.1 0.3 0.2 0.5 5.1 

1992 2.3 0.2 0.8 0.5 3.8 

1993 2.7 0.2 2.5 2.8 8.2 

1994 4.3 0.3 2.2 2.5 9.3 

1995 2.8 0.3 2.4 2.4 7.9 

1996 3.3 0.3 0.8 0.6 5.0


Figure 10: Salvage fellings by damaging agents 

mill. m 3 

12 

10 

8 

6 

4 

2 

0 

1963 

1964 

Others 

Insects 

Air Pollution 

Abiotic 

Forestry and environment 

1965 

1966 

1967 

1968 

1969 

1970 

1971 

1972 

1973 

1974 

1975 

1976 

1977 

1978 

1979 

1980 

Years 

1981 

1982 

1983 

1984 

1985 

1986 

1987 

1988 

1989 

1990 

1991 

1992 

1993 

1994 

1995 

1996 

The new Forest Act No. 289/1995 Coll., in force since 1 January 1996, defines forests as 

national heritage which constitutes an irreplaceable part of the environment. The Act sets 

down the barriers of free dealing with forests as ownership safeguarding public interests 

in forests, and, at the same time, makes it possible to promote a forest owner in dealing 

with forest property within legal limits if public interest is involved, namely through 

granting services or subsidies. In the Czech Republic, important environmental functions 

of forests are the following: water conservancy along with soil protection, recreational 

along with heading benefits, and nature protection along with safeguarding the ecological 

stability of landscape. The forest area providing these functions substantially surpasses 

the area of the categories both of protective and special purpose forests. Also, 46% of the 

area of the present commercial forest category has analogous important environmental 

functions. 

HISTORY OF THE ESTABLISHMENT OF NATURE RESERVES 

The tradition of establishing forest nature reserves in the territory of the present Czech 

Republic is long. The first reserve at all even in the European context was the "Žofínský 

virgin forest" in the Novohradské Mts. The forest property owner, Jiří Augustin 

Langeval-Buquoy issued an order on August 28, 1838 that parts of the forest near the 

village of Žofín (35 ha) be exempted from any forest treatments. The today’s fir-beech 

virgin forest with groups of Norway spruce trees on water-logged soils takes up 98 ha. 

The "Hojná voda" /Abundant Water/ reserve came into existence on the same property in 

the same year. 

At the intercession of forest master Josef John, Duke Jan Adolf Schwarzenberg exempted 

from the current management the virgin forest stands composed of beech, fir and spruce


in the complex of Boubín Mt. in 1858, which were later made the reserve of "Boubínský 

Virgin Forest" (Kubany). The original area of 143 hectares shrank into mere 46 ha. 

In 1903, the Lichtenstein family proclaimed the Norway spruce natural forest reserve of 

287 ha on the Šerák and Keprník hills in the Ash Mountains (Jeseníky Mts.). A beech 

forest reserve of 52 ha was publicly announced by them on the top of the Javořina Mt. in 

1909. The owner of the Harrachov forest estate established the "Labský důl" /Labský 

Hollow/ Norway spruce natural forest reserve of 60 hectares in 1904. 

There were gradually new reserves in forests of the more or less natural character, and 

their official list was issued by the Ministry in 1933. 

In the period between the two world wars, other important reserves of virgin forest 

character were unofficially supported at first and then gradually officially announced after 

1945 and entered in the central list of areas protected by the state. After 1955, this was 

made on the basis of a Law on Nature Protection. The Law on Nature and Landscape 

Protection No. 114 of 1992 ensures the protection of natural forests on the level of so far 

advanced knowledge and in a more complex way than the former laws. Based on this 

Law, all valuable remainders of natural forests in the Czech Republic enjoy legal 

protection in different categories of protected areas (see the next chapter). 

CLASSIFICATION AND MANAGEMENT OF FOREST PROTECTION AREAS 

The Law No. 114/1992 on Nature and Landscape Protection distinguishes 6 categories of 

area under special protection. Their characteristics and management directives are 

presented here in exact wording of the Law: 

A. Extensive areas, unique on a national or international scale, whose considerable part is 

occupied by natural or by human activities little affected ecosystems in which the 

plants, animals and lifeless nature are of extraordinary scientific and educational 

importance, can be proclaimed national parks (NP). Any use of the national parks 

must be subordinated to the preservation and improvement of natural conditions and 

must be in consistence with scientific and educational objectives intended by the 

proclamation. 

Methods and ways of protecting the national parks are discriminated on the basis of 

classification of national park territories into three zones of nature protection defined 

with regard to natural values. The strictest protection regime applies for the first zone. 

More detailed characteristics and regimes of the individual zones are treated by an 

obligatory legal regulation by which the national park is publicly announced. 

B. Extensive areas with the harmonically formed landscape, the characteristic relief, the 

significant share of natural forest ecosystems and ecosystems of permanent grass 

stands, with the abundant representation of tree species and possibly with the 

preserved relics of historical settlement can be proclaimed protected landscape areas 

(PLA). The commercial use of these areas is controlled by the zones of graded 

protection so that their natural conditions are maintained and improved, and the 

optimum environmental functions of these areas preserved and formed further. The 

recreational use is permissible as long as it does not cause any harm to natural values


of the protected landscape areas. In order to define in more detail the way of nature 

protection in the protected landscape areas, there are usually four -at least three- zones 

of graded nature protection the first of them having the most severe protection regime. 

The national park and protected landscape area categories usually use a common term 

of the large protected areas. These two categories can be distinguished from the other 

particularly by the fact that they include seats, they are at least partially managed by 

controlled methods and that they have a recreational function also. 

The other areas under special protection (national nature reserves, national natural 

monuments, nature reserves and natural monuments) normally use a common term of 

small protected areas. 

Within the PLA individual zones (usually within Zone 1) the small protected areas are 

proclaimed the most valuable fragments of preserved ecosystems of different natural 

character degrees. In the case of National Parks, the most valuable parts are included 

in Zone 1 together with their small protected areas. 

C. Small areas of exceptional natural value where the natural relief of a typical geological 

structure binds ecosystems that are important and unique in their character on a 

national or international scale can be proclaimed national nature reserves by the 

nature protection institution, which at the same time defines also the more detailed 

conditions of their protection. The use of national nature reserve is possible only in the 

case that the existing condition of their natural environment can be preserved or 

improved. 

D. Small areas of concentrated natural values with the representation of ecosystems 

typical and important for the geographical region can be proclaimed nature reserves 

by the nature protection institution, which at the same time also defines the closer 

conditions of their protection. 

E. A natural formation of small size, particularly a geological or geomorphological 

formation, a finding place of minerals or rare or endangered species in fragments of 

ecosystems, that are of national or international, scientific or aesthetic significance, 

even a natural formation created apart from by nature itself also by man and his 

activities can be proclaimed national natural monument by the nature protection 

institution which at the same time defines also the more detailed conditions of its 

protection. Changes or damage to the national natural monuments or their commercial 

use are forbidden if they could put into risk their original condition. 

F. A natural formation of small size, particularly a geological or geomorphological 

formation, a finding place of rare minerals or endangered species in fragments of 

ecosystems, that are of regional environmental, scientific or aesthetic significance, 

even a natural formation created apart from by nature itself also by man and his 

activities, can be proclaimed natural monument by the nature protection institution 

which at the same time defines also the more detailed conditions of its protection. 

The development of natural conditions in the small protected areas is controlled by 

tending plans. The plans comprise instructions to regulate natural development and 

human activities, especially so for practical treatments made within the parts of nature 

under special protection. The tending plans are approved by the nature protection 

institution - usually for a period of ten years, and they are used as a binding foundation


material for other kinds of planning documents, particularly for plans of forest 

management and area planning documentation. 

To the date of December 31, 1997 there were 3 national parks in the Czech Republic 

whose total acreage was 1,111 km 2 , i.e. 1.4% of the CR area: The National Park of Giant 

Mountains (Krkonoše Mts.)- 363 km 2 , The National Park of Dyje River Basin (Podyjí) - 

63 km 2 , and The National Park of Bohemian Forest (Šumava) - 685 km 2 . 24 protected 

landscape area with a total acreage of 10,274 km 2 were proclaimed in the Czech Republic 

to the same date, which occupy 13.02% of the total CR area. 

Of total 1,757 small areas under special protection 218 (290 km 2 ) were proclaimed in 

categories of National Natural Monument and National Nature Reserve, and 1,539 

(532.59 km 2 ) in categories Nature Reserve and Natural Monument. Altogether, these 

areas take up as much as 1.05% of the CR area. 

There are 623 small areas under special protection (36% of total small areas under special 

protection), proclaimed primarily in order to protect the preserved forest ecosystems 

(forest preserves) in the Czech Republic. 89, 14, 328 and 192 forest preserves are 

respectively in the category of National Nature Reserves, National Natural Monuments, 

Nature Reserves, and Natural Monuments. 

The representation of forest altitudinal vegetation zones in the forest reserves comes in 

the following table. 

Table 15: Proportion of diverse forest stands in the forest reserves 

FAVZ 

Representation in the 

Czech forest reserves 

Pine forests 7 % 

Oak 17 % 

Beech-Oak 11 % 

Oak-Beech 16 % 

Beech 9 % 

Fir-Beech 18 % 

Spruce-Beech 10 % 

Beech-Spruce 6 % 

Norway spruce 4 % 

Dwarf pine 2 % 

TOTAL 100 % 

The significance of remaining natural forests, particularly of those most valuable onesnational 

nature reserves and nature reserves is accentuated by the fact that they normally 

use to be cores of biocentres. The biocentres (either local, regional or supraregional) 

represent a basic skeleton (supporting) element of regional systems of ecological stability. 

The biocentres that would be mutually interconnected by means of biocorridors are to 

enable a permanent migration of biota as well as an exchange of the entire gene pool.


DEVELOPMENT OF RESEARCH IN NATURAL FORESTS 

The first research plots whose purpose was to characterize the developmental processes in 

the natural forest were established in 1851 in the Boubín virgin forest. Forest master Josef 

JOHN established eight trial plots in this locality, each of 0.57545 ha (GÖPPERT 1868) and 

aligned on them all standing and laying trees reaching the "Derbholz" mass. However, the 

measurements were later never repeated. 

The research of natural forest dynamics in the very proper sense of the word was 

launched by Prof. RNDr. Ing. Alois ZLATNíK, DrSc., founder of Czechoslovak forest 

typology and teacher at the Faculty of Forestry, University of Agriculture in Brno during 

the 30’s. In 4 localities located in the Sub-Carpathian Ukraine which at that time was a 

part of the Czechoslovak Republic he established 14 permanent trial plots whose size 

ranged between 0.60 - 6.58 ha. In these localities, breast-height diameters of trees were 

gauged starting from 4 cm, phytocoenological records made for areas of 20x20m, soil 

profiles in open bores described, soil samples analysed and developmental stages mapped 

(ZLATNíK 1935, 1938). After 65 years, the measurements are being repeated on the same 

plots, the work being carried out by a working group from the Institute of Forest Botany, 

Dendrology and Typology, Faculty of Forestry and Wood Technology, Mendel 

University of Agriculture and Forestry in Brno - now in the territory of Ukraine. 

In the 50 , s, the research of forest reserves was restored by Dr.eng. Jaroslav ŘEHÁK in the 

National Forestry Research Institute, who established research plots in the virgin forest 

reserves of Boubín (4 plots), Mionší (2 plots), and Žákova hora Mt. (1 plot) - each of 0.50 

to 0.75 ha. The research included records on the location of all standing and laying trees, 

their d.b.h., height and the kind of damage. The measurements were made in the Boubín 

forest reserve in 1954, 1959, 1964, 1969, 1972, 1984 and 1996; in the Mionší forest 

reserve in 1953, 1958 and 1963, and in the Žákova hora Mr. forest reserve in 1956, 1961, 

1964, 1967 and 1971. The measurements made until the mid-sixties were made by J. 

ŘEHÁK himself (ŘEHÁK 1959, 1962, 1963, 1964). When the works were stopped in the 

national research institute, the research was continued by self-imposed enthusiasts. The 

repeated measurements made it possible to monitor the changes in the species 

composition, and development of stock and stand structure. 

A similar research project was launched by Prof. eng. Miroslav VYSKOT, DrSc. at the 

Department of Silviculture, University of Agriculture and Forestry in Brno at the end of 

the 50’s. In addition to two transects in the Boubín reserve, Prof. VYSKOT established 

research plots in three other reserves, in which students could work on their essays and 

dissertations during the 70’s and 80’s (VYSKOT 1959, 1968b, 1985). Unfortunately, the 

project ceased to exist at the end of the 80’s. 

The research of forest reserves in the Giant Mountains (Krkonoše Mts.) was started by 

experts from the Research Institute of Forestry and Game Management, Research Station 

Opočno in the 70’s by establishing a network of some 15 research plots - each of 0.25 ha. 

The main subject of study was the tree species storey in original beech stands and natural 

Norway spruce mountain stands on different sites. The basic measurements made in the


period from 1976 to 1980 have then been repeated in intervals of varied lengths and 

currently evaluated (VACEK 1981, 1990). 

The most extensive and complex research of natural forests was established and 

developed by eng. Eduard PRůŠA, CSc. in the 70’s. In the whole area comprising 13 

reserves of which one was even 74 ha in size, all standing and laying trees up from d.b.h. 

of 10 cm were aligned and plotted in the map on a scale 1:1000. The most complete work 

in our country includes phytocoenological records on permanent plots, the description of 

soil profiles and soil sample analyses, detailed measurements of tree stock on stand 

profiles (transects), as well as detailed records on tree species regeneration and 

dominating kinds of undergrowth. These measurements of extraordinary importance for 

Czech forestry were privately funded and made in Mr. PRůŠA’s own free time without any 

government support (PRůŠA 1985a, 1990). 

Table 16: The list of monitored localities 

Name of locality 

Category of 

protection 

Measured 

area (ha) 

Forest altitudial 

vegetation zone 

Basic monit. 

Repeated 

monit. 

Protected 

landscape area 

or national park 

Bílá Opava NNR x 8.-9. 1974 1999 Jeseníky 

Boubín NNR 46.66 6.-7. 1972 1996 Šumava 

Cahnov-Soutok NNR 17.32 1. 1973 1994 ----- 

Diana NR 19.78 5.-6. (1991), 1994 ----- 

Hojná voda NNM 8.86 6. 1991, (1994), 1997 ----- 

Jiřina NM 1.82 1. 1978 1999 ----- 

Kohoutov NNR 25.93 3.-4. 1978 1998 Křivoklátsko 

Milešice NR 8.84 6.-(7.) 1972 1996 Šumava 

Mionší NNR 5.92 5. (1994), 1995 Beskydy 

Polom NR 19.13 5. 1973 1995 Železné hory 

Ranšpurk NNR 22.25 1. 1973 1994 ----- 

Razula NNR 22.84 5. 1972 1995 Beskydy 

Salajka NNR 19.03 5. 1974 1994 Beskydy 

Stožec NM 16.21 6. 1974 1998 Šumava 

Velká Pleš NNR 10.45 1.-3. 1976 1999 Křivoklátsko 

Žákova hora NNR 17.46 6. 1974 1995 Žďárské vrchy 

Žofín NNR 74.50 6.-7. 1975 1997 ----- 

Note: x - investigation was carried out on a long transect and not on a continuous area 

NNR - National Nature Reserve, NNM - National Nature Monument, 

NR - Nature Reserve, NM - Nature Monument


PRESENT STAGE OF RESEARCH ON NATURAL FORESTS 

We cannot be satisfied with the present situation in the research of virgin forest reserves 

in the Czech Republic. There is no government guarantee of a long-term research 

programme by means of a relevant research or scientific institution. The research project 

is ensured by two working groups: 

1. Research Institute of Forestry and Game Management, Research Station Opočno 

(RNDr. Stanislav VACEK, CSc.) runs works on the above mentioned research plots in 

the Giant Mountains (Krkonoše Mts.). 

2. A research team of experts from several institutions runs 

a long-term programme "The study of dynamics of virgin forest reserves in the Czech 

Republic" which is roofed by the CR Agency of Nature and Landscape Protection and 

so far funded from grants of the CR Ministry of Environment. The programme 

includes repeated measurements in the network of virgin forest reserves founded by E. 

PRůŠA (see preceding chapter) with his original methodology being observed in 

general terms. The method of data processing and plotting in GIS has been up-dated. 

The system and its software enable to make digital maps of tree position, 

cartographical plotting of regeneration changes with time, tree stock, phytocoenoses 

and soil. The responsible project chief manager is Dr. eng. Tomáš VRŠKA. 

REFERENCES 

Results from the research of natural forests in the Czech Republic were published in 5 books, 29 

scientific works, and 24 technical articles. 

Books: 

PRÙŠA, E. (1985a) Die böhmischen und mährischen Urwälder - ihre Struktur und Ökologie. 

Academia, Praha, 580 pp. 

PRÙŠA, E. (1990) Přirozené lesy ČR ( The Natural forests of the Czech Republic). Státní 

zemědělské nakladatelství, Praha, 248 pp. 

VYSKOT, M., a kol. (1981) Československé pralesy (The Virgin forests of the Czechoslovakia). 

Academia, Praha, 270 pp. 

ZLATNíK, A. / ZVORYKIN, I. (1935) Studie o státních lesích na Podkarpatské Rusi (The study about 

national forests in the Sub-Carpathian Ukraine). Sborník výzkumných ústavù zemědělských 

ČSR, sv. 127, 206 pp. 

ZLATNíK, A. / KORSUň, F. / KOČETOV, F. / KSENEMAN, M. (1938) Prozkum přirozených lesù na 

Podkarpatské Rusi (The research of natural forests in the Sub-Carpathian Ukraine).. Sborník 

výzkumných ústavù zemědělských ČSR, sv. 152, 524 pp. 

Scientific works: 

BíBA, M. (1978) Státní přírodní rezervace Velká hora na Karlštejnsku, vývoj, stav a výhled (The 

National nature reserve Velká hora in the Karlštejn area: development, present situation and


prospects). (Doctorand dissertation). Vědecký lesnický ústav v Kostelci nad Černými lesy, 55 

pp. 

CHMELAř, J. (1957) Studie o vývoji jedle v podmínkách přirozeného, člověkem neovlivněného lesa, 

jako příspěvek k řešení otázky celkového ústupu jedle (The study of fir development in the 

conditions of natural forest, unaffected by man, as a contribution to the issue of general fir 

decline). (Doctorand dissertation). Depon. in: knihovna Úst. les. bot., dendr. a typol. LDF 

MZLU Brno, 150 pp. 

MíCHAL, I. (1983) Dynamika přírodního lesa I. - VI ( Natural forest dynamics I - VI). Živa, XXXI 

(LXIX) , (1983 (1-6), pp. 8-13, 48-53, 85-88, 128-133, 163-168, 233-238. 

MOUCHA, P. (1978) Ekologická kritéria péče o přirozená lesní společenstva v navrhované Chráněné 

krajinné oblasti Křivoklátsko (Environmental criteria of tending natural forest communities in 

the proposed Protected Landscape Area of Křivoklát). (Doctorand dissertation). Vědecký 

lesnický ústav v Kostelci nad Černými lesy. 

PIŠTA, F. (1972) Lesní společenstva šumavského pralesa (Forest communities of the Bohemian 

Virgin Forest), Lesnictví, 18 (XLV), 1972 (5), pp. 415 - 437. 

PIŠTA, F. / PRÙŠA, E. (1974) Milešický prales. Lesnictví ( The Milešice Virgin Forest), 20 (XLVII), 

1974 (4), pp. 313 - 343. 

PRÙŠA, E. (1985b) Státní přírodní rezervace Kohoutov, její ekologie a struktura. Lesnictví (The 

National nature reserve Kohoutov: its ecology and structure), 31 (LVIII), 1985 (11), pp. 989 - 

1016. 

PRÙŠA, E. (1988) Vývoj stromového patra Žofínského pralesa za období 1975 - 1987 (Tree layer 

development in the Žofín virgin forest in the period 1975-1987). Lesprojekt, Brandýs n. L., 75 

pp. 

PRÙŠA, E. (1989) Boubínský prales, jeho ekologie a struktura v letech 1972 - 1988 (The Boubín 

Virgin Forest: its ecology and structure in the period 1972-1988). Lesprojekt, Brandýs n. L., 

75 pp. 

ŘEHáK, J. (1959) Struktura porostù Boubínského pralesa a přirozená obnova hlavních dřevin (The 

structure of stands in the Boubín Virgin Forest and the natural regeneration of main tree 

species). Lesnictví, 5 (XXXII), 1959 (2), pp. 119 - 138. 

ŘEHáK, J. (1962) Některé nové poznatky ze studia přirozených lesù (Some new knowledge from the 

study of natural forests). (Doctorand dissertation). VÚLHM Zbraslav-Strnady, 111 pp. 

ŘEHáK, J. (1963) Poznatky ze studia přirozených lesù rezervace Mionší a jejich využití v 

podrostním hospodářství (Knowledge from the study of natural forests in the Mionší reserve, 

and their application in shelterwood systems). Záv. výzkumná zpráva. VÚLHM Zbraslav- 

Strnady, 119 pp. 

ŘEHáK, J. (1964) Rùstové změny v přirozených lesích rezervace Boubínský prales (Growth changes 

in the Boubín virgin forest reserve natural forests). Závěrečná výzkumná zpráva. VÚLHM 

Zbraslav-Strnady, 72 pp. 

STANěK, T. (1989) Komparativní výzkum významných pralesovitých reliktù v ČSR (The 

comparison research of important virgin forest relics in the Czechoslovak Republic). 

(Doctorand dissertation). LF VŠZ Brno.


STANěK, T./ BARTáK, M. (1989) Strukturální analýza pralesa Cahnov v ekosystému jihomoravského 

lužního lesa (The structural analysis of Cahnov virgin forest in the ecosystem of South 

Moravian floodplain forest). Lesnictví, 35 (LXII), 1989 (6), pp. 507-520. 

VACEK, S. (1981) Věková struktura autochtonní smrčiny v Krkonoších. Lesnictví (Age structure of 

the autochthonous Norway spruce stand in the Giant Mountains - Krkonoše Mts.). 27 (LIV), 

1981 (3), pp. 213 - 228. 

VACEK, S. (1990) Analýza autochtonních smrkových populací na Strmé stráni v Krkonoších (The 

analysis of autochthonous Norway spruce populations of Strmá stráò in the Giant Mountains - 

Krkonoše Mts.). Opera corcontica, 27, 1990, pp. 59 - 103. 

VACEK, S. / BALCAR, Z. / JURáSEK, A. (1984) Struktura pùvodních bučin ve východních Krkonoších 

(The structure of original beech stands in the eastern Giant Mountains - Krkonoše Mts.). 

Lesnictví, 30 (LVII), 1984 (9), pp. 767 - 782. 

VACEK, S. / CHROUST, L. / SOUČEK, J. (1994) Produkční analýza autochtonní smrčiny (The 

production analysis of autochthonous Norway spruce stand). Lesnictví - Forestry, 40, 1994 

(11), pp. 457 - 469. 

VACEK, S. / CHROUST, L. / SOUČEK, J. (1996) Produkční analýza autochtonních bučin (The 

production analysis of autochthonous beech stands).Lesnictví - Forestry, 42, 1996 (2), pp. 54 - 

66. 

VANěK, M. (1990) 30 let vývoje boubínské pralesovité rezervace (Thirty years of development of 

the Boubín Virgin Forest Reserve). Správa CHKO Šumava, 93 pp. 

VRŠKA, T. (1996a) (Pra)les Diana. (The Diana (virgin) forest). Lesnictví-Forestry, 42, 1996 (9), 

pp. 393 - 413. 

VRŠKA, T. (1997a) Prales Cahnov po 21 letech. (The Cahnov virgin forest after 21 years). 

Lesnictví-Forestry ,43, 1997 (4), pp. 155-180. 

VRŠKA, T. (1997b) Sledování dynamiky vývoje pralesovitých rezervací ČR na příkladě rezervací 

Cahnov-Soutok a Diana (The study of dynamics of development of virgin forest reserves in the 

Czech Republic on the example of the Cahnov-Soutok and Diana reserves). Doctorand 

dissertation, LDF MZLU Brno 1997, 153 pp. 

VRŠKA, T. (1998a) Prales Salajka po 20 letech (1974-1994) (The Salajka virgin forest after 20 years 

(1974-1994)). Lesnictví-Forestry, 44, 1998 (4), in print. 

VRŠKA, T. (1998b) Prales Ranšpurk po 21 letech (1973-1994) (The Ranšpurk virgin forest after 21 

years (1973-1994)). Lesnictví-Forestry, 44, 1998, accepted for publication 

VYSKOT, M. (1959) Druhová a prostorová skladba Lanžhotského pralesa a poměry přirozené 

obnovy (The species and spatial composition of the Lanžhot virgin forest and the conditions of 

natural regeneration). Lesnictví, 5 (XXXII), 1959 (2), pp. 157-174. 

VYSKOT, M. (1968b) Porostní struktura a přirozená obnova v pralesovité rezervaci Bumbálka (Stand 

structure and natural regeneration in the virgin forest reserve of Bumbálka). Lesnický časopis, 

14 (XLI), 1968 (7), pp. 607 - 620. 

VYSKOT, M. (1985) Struktura a vývoj pralesovité rezervace Roštýn (The structure and development 

of the virgin forest reserve of Roštýn). Lesnictví, 31 (LVIII), 1985 (5), pp. 387 - 410. 

The list of technical articles is irrelevant for international presentation.


NATURAL FORESTS AND FORESTS PROTECTED BY LAW IN 

POLAND 

ABSTRACT 

by Roman ZIELONY * 

The protection of nature has a long tradition in Poland’s forests. National Parks and 

Nature Reserves are particularly important in Polish forest policy of today. In the State 

owned forests, as much as 50% (approx. 3,353 M ha) are forests with the dominating 

nature protection function. 

OUTLINE OF POLAND’S FOREST 

Poland is located in the central part of Europe at the transient zone between the oceanic 

and continental climates influence. Its geographical situation, the differentiated landscape 

following the geological and geomorphologic processes, with 90% of lowland type 

landscape, the diversified soil conditions as well as, the uneven spatial distribution of its 

inhabitants - all these have contributed to the eventual richness of Poland’s nature. An 

important element of Polish landscape and natural richness is the forest that covers an 

area of 8.7 million ha which makes 28.1% of the country’s total acreage (GUS 1997). 

Forest occurs chiefly in the area either not useful for agriculture or - that of little 

demographic density. In the past, forest used to occupy as much as 90% of the total area 

of Poland. The deforestation processes had been initiated in the 14 th century and the trend 

continued till year 1939. The most intensive deforestation were taking part at the turn of 

19 th /20 th centuries. The organised, rational management of forest resources has started in 

Polish land, similarly as in other Central European countries, at the turn of 18 th /19 th 

centuries. Large has been the impact of the normal forest model implementation on the 

today’s state of Poland’s forest. The area of forest has started growing in Poland only 

since the year 1945, when the forest landscape level was 20.8% (6.4 million ha). In the 

period 1945-1996, the area of Polish forest has increased by 2.3 million ha, and the 

standing volume has increased in this period of 662 hm 3 that is 173%. The present 

condition of forest is a combined effect of the predominant site conditions, the character 

of natural range of the main forest-forming woody tree species: Norway spruce, European 

beech, Silver fir and Scots pine; as well as the development trends of agriculture, industry 

and forestry. 

* Dr. R.Z., Agricultural University SGGW, Department of Forest Management and Forest Geodesy, 

Rakowiecka 26/30, 02-528 Warsaw, Poland

46 Natural Forests and Forests Protected by Law in Poland 

At present, coniferous and mixed coniferous/broad-leaved forest dominate in Poland with 

Scots pine and Norway spruce as the most abundantly occurring tree species covering 

69% and 5.8% of total forest area, respectively. The broad-leaved species dominate 

22.5% of forest area. Among them, the most important are: oaks (6%), birch (6%) and 

beech (4%). Considering the age structure of Polish forest, the largest portion of forest 

area is covered by stands 21-60 years of age, with a lot of stands growing on abandoned 

arable land. 

The volume of annual wood cut has been equal during the last few years about 22 million 

m 3 . 

The ownership relationships and some selected parameters of Poland’s forests and 

protected objects are presented in Tables 1-5 and Fig 1. 

Table 1: Selected parameters of Poland’s forests, as on 31.12.1996 (GUS 1997) 

Ownership 

Area 

in 000 ha 

Total 

volume 

M. m 3 

Volume 

per ha 

m 3 /ha 

Average age 

years 

Mean volume 

increment 

m 3 /ha/year 

Public 7 282 

State Forest 6 881 1 341 197 55 3.58 

National Parks 177 

Communal 77 

Other 147 

Private 1 497 176* 118* 37* 3.19* 

Total 8 779 1 572 183 

* - with communal forest included 

Table 2: Protected objects in Poland, as on 31.12.1996 (GUS 1997) 

Type of nature protection 

objects 

Quantity Area 

(thous. ha) 

Percentage of 

country’s total area 

National parks 22 301.0 1.0 

Reserves* 1 183 128.0 0.4 

Landscape parks 106 2 082.0 6.7 

Area of protected landscape 309 6 612.5 21.1 

Monuments of nature 30 205* 

Other** 3 512 59.6 0.2 

Total 9 183.1 29.4 

* - including 23010 single trees and 4537 clumps of trees 

** - ecological values, documentation stations, landscape natural associations


Table 3: Polish National Parks, as on 31.12.1996 (KZPN* 1997) 

No. National Park 

Creation 

year 

Area 

(ha) 

IUCN 

Category 

Nature 

museum 

Didactic 

center 

Periodical 

1. Babia Góra MaB 1955 1,734 II + - - 

2. Bialowieža E,MaB,WH (1932) 1947 10,502 II + + Parki narodowe i rezerwaty 

3. Biebrza R, E 1993 59,223 - - - - 

4. Bieszczady MaB 1973 27,834 II + + Roczniki Bieszczadzkie 

5. Bory Tucholskie 1996 4,789 - - - - 

6. Drawa 1990 11,019 II - - - 

7. Gorce 1981 6,763 II - - - 

8. Góry Stolowe 1994 6,280 - - - - 

9. Kampinos 1959 36,533 II + - Puszcza Kampinoska 

10. Karkonosze MaB 1959 5,573 II + - - 

11. Magura 1995 19,962 - - - - 

12. Narew 1996 7,350 - - - - 

13. Ojców 1956 1,890 V + + Pradnik 

14. Pieniny (1932) 1954 2,346 II - - Pieniny - przyroda i 

człowiek 

15. Polesie 1990 9,649 II + + - 

16. Roztocze 1974 8,482 II + + - 

17. Slowinski MaB, R 1967 18,618 II + - - 

18. Šwietokrzyski 1950 7,626 II + - - 

19. Tatra MaB (1947) 1954 21,164 II + + Tatry 

20. Wielkopolski 1957 7,620 II + + Morena 

21. Wigry 1989 15,122 V - - - 

22. Wolin 1960 10,937 II + - Klify 

The Board of Polish National Parks 1988 - - - - Parki Narodowe 

TOTAL 301,016 14 7 9 

MaB - Bioshere Reserve UNESCO list E - Europe’s diploma 

WH - World Heritage Site * - KZPN = The Board of Polish National Parks 

R - RAMSAR convention E - Europe’s diploma 

Figure 1: The protection of nature in Poland 

7000 

6000 

5000 

4000 

3000 

2000 

1000 

0 

National 

parks 

Nature 

reserves 

* - KZPN = The Board of Polish National Parks 

Landsca 

pe parks 

Regions 

of 

protecte 

d 

1980 

1990 

1996

48 Natural Forests and Forests Protected by Law in Poland


Table 5: Nature reserves in Poland, as on 31.12.1996 (GUS 1997) 

Total Strict conservation 

Number of Area (ha) Number of Area (ha) 

Reserves’ type reserves 

total 

mean area 

per object 

reserves 

total 

mean area 

per object 

Faunistic reserves 121 32 949 272 8 1 821 228 

Landscape reserves 101 35 635 352 5 473 95 

Forest reserves 588 43 603 74 18 1 011 56 

Peatland reserves 121 8 629 71 29 1 070 37 

Floristic reserves 143 2 426 16 19 185 10 

Water reserves 24 2 867 106 3 11 4 

Reserves of unanimated nature 50 1 435 30 8 25 3 

Steppe reserves 32 434 13 15 90 6 

Reserves of halophytes 3 23 7 1 1 1 

Total 1 183 128 001 108 106 4 687 44 

HISTORICAL OUTLINE OF THE PROTECTION OF NATURE AND FORESTS 

The history of nature protection in forests has been closely connected with the history of 

nature protection as such, the deforestation processes and forest management. The 

rudiments of nature protection go back as far as the beginnings of the State of Poland. The 

most important events in this respect are those legal regulations protecting either rare 

species or the forest belonging to the sovereign (OLACZEK et al. 1996, RADZIEJOWSKI 

1996). Among them are: 

– introduction of beaver protection in early 11 th century, confirmed in 16 th century 

– introduction of punishment for cutting trees in other owner’s forest in 1347 

– the 1432 law protecting yew tree 

– the 1443 law limiting the possibility to hunt for wild horses, moose and aurochs 

– the 1868 Act on protection of marmot and chamois 

– the 1925 government commission regulating the matters of nature protection 

– the 1934 nature protection act. 

The protection of large-area objects has started in forests (BOINSKI 1997 after WALAS 

1957, CZUBINSKI et al. 1977, OLACZEK et al. 1996, RADZIEJOWSKI 1996). The ever first 

protected areas in Poland were: 

– Ziesbuch Forest in Tuchola Coniferous Forest complex - under strict protection 

since 1827; at present known as ‘Cisy Staropolskie Reserve’ in Wierzchlas; 

– ‘Pamiatka Pieniacka’ reserve established in 1886 in Podolye; 

– a 100 ha forest reserve in the area of the today’s Gorce National Park (its idea goes 

back to year 1916); 

– a 7.5 ha reserve surrounding the Czorsztyn Castle remnants, established 1921; 

– a 45.95 ha ‘Reserwat’ forest in Bialowieza National Park, established 1921 - the 

first legal attempt to protect Bialowieza Primeval Forest and, subsequently, BNP; 

– two strict reserves (196 ha and 114 ha) in Swietokrzyskie Mountains, established 

1922;


– a 1.5 ha ‘Zamczysko’ reserve established 1924; the first protected part of the 

today’s Kampinos N P. 

In the period between two world wars, nature protection in Poland had been intensively 

developing. Particularly fast was the increase in protected area in State Forests. In year 

1923 a total of 26 forest reserves covering 8496 ha were present, with 2707 ha under 

strict protection. In year 1937, out of 180 reserves of 28478 ha area, 112 were located in 

State Forests (CZUBINSKI et al. 1977). Also, national parks had been established in that 

period, here forest was the chief object of protection. The historical development of the 

network of national parks and nature reserves in Poland as well as selected data on their 

present-day status are presented in Tables 6-7 and Figures 2-4. 

Table 6: The development of the national parks in Poland (GUS 1997, CZUBINSKI, et al. 1977) 

Year Number total 

Area (ha) 

forest strictly protected area 

total forest 

1939 5 17 446 

1950 2 11 150 

1960 10 74 627 55 934 

1970 11 94 678 66 886 20 265 15 443 

1980 13 118 901 82 906 30 944 21 681 

1990 17 165 933 118 787 42 203 29 383 

1994 19 249 205 151 886 59 950 46 294 

1996 22 301 056 183 774 58 580 45 191 

Table 7: The development of the network of reserves in Poland (GUS 1997, CZUBINSKI, et al. 1977) 

All reserves Strict reserves 

Number area (ha) number area (ha) 

Year of objects 

total 

mean area 

per object 

of object 

total 

mean area per 

object 

1918 39 1 469 

1937 180* 28 478 

1960 366 23 874 

1970 550 52 640 

1980 759 75 292 99 122 8 675 71 

1990 1 001 116 952 117 109 7 207 66 

1996 1 183 128 001 108 106 4 687 44 

* - additionally projected 68 objects


FORMS AND CATEGORIES OF NATURE PROTECTION 

According to the Nature Protection Act of 1991, different forms and categories of nature 

protection are defined in Poland. Out of them, the most important ones for the protection 

of forests are: 

National park - a national park covers protected area distinctive of its particularly high 

scientific, natural, social, cultural and educational value, of at least 1000 ha area. All 

elements of nature and landscape are protected on an area of a national park. All activity 

in the area of a national park are nature protection-oriented, and they have absolute 

priority. The most substantial aim of a national park is to learn and conserve the whole of 

its natural systems together with the conditions of their functioning as well as 

reconstruction of deformed and extinct links of our domestic nature. A national park 

becomes established following a decree of Government. 

Figure 2: National Parks in Poland


National Parks 

Existing parks Prospective parks 

1. Babia Góra 8. Góry Stolowe 15. Polesie 23. Mazury 

2. Bialowieža 9. Kampinos 16. Roztocze 24. Jura 

3. Biebrza 10. Karkonosze 17. Slowinski 25. Turnicki 

4. Bieszczady 11. Magura 18. Šwietokrzyski 

5. Bory Tucholskie 12. Narew 19. Tatra 

6. Drawa 13. Ojców 20. Wielkopolski 

7. Gorce 14. Pieniny 21. Wigry 

22. Wolin 

Figure 3: Forest ecosystems in Poland’s National Parks 

Area [thous. ha] 

350 

300 

250 

200 

150 

100 

50 

0 

1960 1970 1980 1990 1996 

Forests Other


Figure 4: The area of Reserves in Poland 

Area [ha] 

140000 

120000 

100000 

80000 

60000 

40000 

20000 

0 

1918 

1937 

1960 

1965 

years 

Landscape park - a landscape park is an area protected due to its natural, historical and 

cultural value; landscape parks are established with the aim to preserve, popularize and 

disseminate these values under conditions of rational land use management. Arable 

ground, forest ground and other forms of land use located within a landscape park’s 

administrative borders are left unchanged as they are used. A landscape park is 

established following a decree of a province chief administrator (a voivode). 

Nature reserve - is an area where protected are natural or near-natural ecosystems, target 

plant and animal species, elements of unanimated nature - significantly valuable because 

of either scientific, cultural or landscape reasons. Reserves are established following a 

decision of Minister. 

Area of protected landscape - covers ground of distinct landscapes in different types of 

ecosystems. The management practices in such systems should ensure the lasting state of 

relative ecological balance. This form of protection is forced into existence following a 

decision of voivode or a resolution of the local community council. 

Monuments of nature - individual objects of either living or unanimated nature or: 

clusters of such objects, of particular scientific, cultural, historic or landscape value, with 

distinct signs of their individual character, e.g. old-growth and large-size trees and shrubs 

of both domestic or exotic species (cf, Appendix A), wells, water-falls, rocks, valleys, 

erratic boulders and caves. 

Protection of species - the purpose of this form of nature protection is prevent the 

wildlife species of plant and animals (particularly: rare or endangered species) to vanish 

as well as to conserve the existing specific and genetic diversity (ANONYMOUS 1995a,c). 

For the most endangered species, the domestic red data books have been published 

(GLOWACINSKI 1992, ZARZYCKI and KAZMIERCZAKOWA 1993). 

1970 

1980 

1990 

1996


Environmental values - these are worth of protection remnants of such ecosystems that 

are significant in the preservation of unique genetic resources and site types like, e.g. 

natural small area water reservoirs, clumps of trees and shrubs, peat lands, marshes, and 

dunes, patches of non-managed and unused vegetation, old river basins, river basin 

slopes. 

Nature-landscape system - such systems protect extremely valuable fragments of both 

natural and cultural landscape, in order to preserve their aesthetic values. Besides, a 

distinction is made between the strict protection and partial protection in either national 

parks, nature reserves and in the protection of particular plant and animal species. 

Strict protection - if this form of protection is employed, any man’s intervention into the 

natural environment has to be stopped. The purpose of the strict protection is to enable the 

course of natural processes. In objects under strict protection man may only study and 

observe the nature and no intervention is allowed. 

Partial protection (active protection) has been aimed onto the active participation of man 

in the natural processes in order to: 

– conserve or reconstruct the object of protection, 

– acceleration or inhibition of natural succession, 

– strengthening of ecosystems. 

The difference between the partial protection and the routine management activities is in 

the goal and the intensity of activity employed. The protection activity is only aimed at 

the nature, with no economic gains in mind. 

Both strict protection and partial protection are being accomplished in the spatial form in 

national parks and nature reserves as well as in the form of species protection of plants 

and animals. 

MANAGING NATURE PROTECTION 

The problems of protection and adequate regulation of the natural environment formation, 

the rational utilisation of natural resources and preservation of the richness and natural 

heritage are in Poland of importance equal to that of the problems of economic 

development. This importance has found its formal expression in the fact of establishment 

the Ministry of Environment Protection, Natural Resources and Forestry. The 

management of nature protection and supervision have been subject to wide consultation 

with society. Within the organisational framework of the Ministry of Environment 

Protection, Natural Resources and Forestry there is the position of the Chief Nature 

Conservator, the Department of Nature Conservation and the Chief Board of National 

Parks. The Minister of Environment Protection, Natural Resources and Forestry has an 

advisory body that is the State Council of Nature Protection, including a total of 30 

specialists representing different field of natural sciences. In every of the 49 provinces 

(voivodships) a Provincial Nature Conservator acts on behalf of the Province main 

administrator. A consulting and opinion-making body at the voivode’s is a provincial 

Commission of Nature Protection - grouping 20 people - natural sciences representatives 

and nature protection activists. A director of a national park makes use of opinion of the 

park’s scientific council. A landscape park director uses the opinion of the park’s 

scientific-technical board.


NATURAL FORESTS 

The term ‘natural forest’ is often understood and interpreted differently. In Poland, a 

natural forest is most often acknowledged such forest growing on permanently forest area, 

with its species composition and vertical structure fitting well the site’s potential 

characteristics; besides, in order to be named ‘natural’ a forest cannot bear visible signs of 

either degradation or degeneration. This can be either a naturally established forest or 

forest planted by man. The area of natural forest that comply with the above-presented 

definition is unknown. Assuming, the above definition is met by managed forest of age 

over 60 years, the estimated area of natural forest would be some 2 M. ha. Another 

definition of natural forest is the following: ‘natural forest is forest established 

spontaneously, without the participation of man, where preserved are at a near-primeval 

degree the natural biocoenotic relationships, among others, the structure and stand species 

composition, and the management activities employed do not cause disadvantageous 

changes in the ecosystems under question (WIECKO 1996). The area of natural forest 

understood following the last definition is much smaller - perhaps some 200 000 - 500 

000 ha and these forests can be found only in non-facilitated terrain. 

The participation of Poland in the works of international forestry organisations and 

institutions of nature protection has resulted in the actual learning of the country’s acreage 

of natural forest as well as the principles of their determination. The organisations 

mentioned have done a tremendous job in the 1990-es for the definition, assessment and 

learning a lot of problems in the field of the sustainable development of forestry. One of 

such projects was the survey of present state of environmentally important natural and 

semi-natural forest types in selected countries of Central and Eastern Europe: Russia, 

Poland, the Ukraine and Hungary. In its Polish part, the project has found its final 

expression in a scientific seminar followed by the publication of its Proceedings’ 

Conservation and sustainable use of forests in Poland (LONKIEWICZ 1996). In this paper, 

16.7% of the country’s forest area have been classified as ecologically important forest 

types (Table 8). 

In the 1995 survey of biological diversity in State Forests a total of 744 000 ha were 

acknowledged natural and environmentally important forest (Table 9, Fig. 5). The 

importance of the object of natural forest is well visible, e.g. while analysing their 

presence in the Polish network ECONET: with national core areas and international core 

areas determined (LIRO 1995). 

Table 8: Environmentally important types of forest in Poland (LONKIEWICZ 1996b) 

Type of forest Area (thous. ha) Per cent of country’s total 

forest area 

Coastal forests 219.1 2.5 

Riverside forests 346.9 4.0 

Boreal forests 225.8 2.6 

Broadleaved forests 475.8 5.4 

Mountainous forests 194.9 2.2 

Total 1 462.5 16.7


Table 9: Survey results of biological diversity in State Forests in year 1995 (LONKIEWICZ 

1996a) 

Type of object State Forests Maximum 

number area (ha) RDLP** number area (ha) 

All existing reserves 849 66 398 Bialystok 128 19 402 

strict reserves 30 1 043 

Planned reserves 548 45 638 Lublin 119 8 180 

Ecological values 3 798 13 952 Lublin 747 1 980 

Natural forest 15 962 281 726 Olsztyn 121 848 

Environmentally important forest 37 480 402 469 Bialystok 7 746 40 373 

as above - wet sites 

Peat lands, marshes, heathers, 

32 733 303 932 Olsztyn 4 407 

mountain meadows, geological 19 155 60 049 

objects * 

Bird nests protection zones - total 

inch black stork 

osprey 

eagle owl 

1 741 

761 

40 

43 

Bialystok 533 

** - Regional Direction of State Forests * - yet non - required ecological values 

NATURE PROTECTION IN FORESTS OF NATIONAL PARKS AND NATURE RESERVES 

All the activities undertaken in national parks and reserves have their rationale in the 

plans of conservation. These documents are being prepared for a period of 20 years by the 

top specialists in the field of nature protection. In case of nature reserves, usually 1-3 

people are employed, in case of plans for national parks, the staff covers a lot of people, 

grouping specialists representing different institutions. 

Plans of nature protection as prepared for nature reserves contain one or two volumes and 

they include inventory data, a diagnosis of the natural environment state as well as a plan 

of future activities in the field of protection of entire nature, with particular attention paid 

to the main objects of protection. 

Plans of nature protection as prepared for national parks consist of a lot of different 

elaborations. Each of them contains inventory data, a diagnosis of the natural environment 

state as well as a plan of future activities in the field of protection of a determined part of 

the park’s nature. Besides, social, historic, and economic-technical parts are, also, 

included in the plan. A general elaboration contains a synthesis of all the partial 

elaborations. 

Forest ecosystems predominate in the national parks and nature reserves area. In national 

parks, forest formation participates from 3 to 95% of their total area (Table 4). Out of the 

total of 1069 nature reserves at the early 1996 year, 877 were located in the State Forests 

administered area (WROBEL 1997). They occupy an area equal 66.4 thousand ha, 

participating thus in 55% to the total area of all the reserves. 

Comparing with the managed forest, the detail of description of forests located in national 

parks and reserves while preparing their plans of protection is far greater. The 

intervention activity as planned for national parks and reserves are result of protection 

needs and the principle of lasting occurrence only. In such objects it is a general rule that 

intervention is limited to small areas and its intensity is low. In terrain covered with strict


protection, no intervention is being performed. In nature reserves, while surveying, a 

classification system is employed, organised according to the main object of protection 

and type of environment (Appendix B). 

Figure 5: Objects of particular high value in the state forests (State as on 31 December 1995) 

NATURE CONSERVATION IN MANAGED FOREST 

The functions of nature protections and those of management often overlap in many 

forests, regardless the ownership or prevailing system of management. Due to the specific 

character and their social importance, both forests and forestry are in Poland, similarly as 

in the rest of Europe, under a special ‘supervision’ of society. 

a) rudiments of forest management 

Forest management in Poland is being accomplished, following the regulations of the 

1991 Forest Act with its later amendments of 1997, according to the following principles: 

– the principle of common protection of forest, 

– the principle of forest lasting, 

– sustainable use of all the functions of forest, 

– increasing forest resources. 

Considering the extraordinary non-productive functions and natural value of forest, 

Poland’s forests should be grouped onto: 

– forest subject to special legal protection (forest in national parks and nature 

reserves) 

– managed forest (protection forest and multiply-function forest). 

The last category mentioned expresses well the importance of environment-forming and 

social functions of the managed forest (Tables 10 - 11). This classification system has 

been binding for years but it is continuously improved. On the other hand, in protection 

forest 9 categories are being determined, the classification based, among other criteria, on 

their location and/or dominating function of the entire of part of forest complex.


Table 10: Forest dominating functions in the State Forests, as on 31.12.1996, (GUS 1997) 

Forest Area (thous. ha) Per cent of area 

Protective forest 3 353 50.2 

Multi-functional (commercial) forest 3 328 49.8 

Total 6 681 100.0 

Table 11: Categories of protection forests, as on 31.12.1996, (GUS 1997) 

Category Area (thous. ha) Per cent of area 

Soil - protection 235.9 7.0 

Water - protection 1 046.9 31.2 

People mass recreation 363.8 10.8 

Landscape 184.3 5.5 

Naturally valuable 37.5 1.2 

Refuges of protected animals 55.7 1.7 

City - and near city forest 386.5 11.5 

Industrial pollution area 714.0 21.3 

Remaining 329.3 9.8 

Total 3 353.9 100.0 

b) the system of nature protection and natural environment conservation in State 

Forests 

Among the many functions to be fulfilled by forest, growing has been the role of the 

functions of nature protection. These last functions are being fulfilled both by forests 

covered by the legal forms of nature protection and those remaining forests. These 

functions predominate in national parks and nature reserves, while their role in the 

remaining forest depends largely upon the forest’s category of protection and its natural 

richness. Considering the aims and tasks of nature protection and the idea of ecodevelopment, 

first of all defined should be the term nature protection in forestry and 

particularly so - in the managed forest (the protection forest and multiply-function forest). 

I suggest the following definition: the protection of nature in the modern forestry is: 

– the classic activity covering the conservation effort (preservation) as carried out by 

specialised formations of nature protection service and forest administration; 

– taking care of non-productive functions of forest 

– rational forest management that, through the activity meeting the public demand: 

• ensures the lasting of forest and uninterrupted supply with forest raw 

materials, 

• leads, if possible, to increase the country’s forest cover, 

• takes care of the preservation of the richness of our domestic nature 

• unites the problems of forestry with those of natural environment formation 

(including landscape) 

– understanding that the forester’s activity impacts not only the forest where the 

intervention is carried out


– public relations between society and the role of forest and foresters 

– limiting the impact of non-forest threats onto the forest formation 

– formation and protection of natural environment. 

The accomplished in Poland forest policy considering the demands of the sustainable 

development, focuses on the functions and problems of nature protection (GRZYWACZ 

1994, SZUJECKI 1994). The importance of problems of nature protection in forest policy is 

evident in, e.g. the nation-wide assessment of forest (LONKIEWICZ 1996a) or in the 

introduction of the obligatory preparation of programs of nature protection at the scale of 

forest district (ANONYMOUS 1996b) the main purpose of which is illustration of natural 

richness, presentation of natural values and threats, and presentation of object of interest 

on the background of the region or the country; determination of hierarchy of groups of 

functions of particular forest complexes, definition of new objects worth protection and 

determination of aims and methods of their protection. The protection of nature in the 

biggest forest enterprise in Poland: State Forests is being accomplished in accordance 

with the Forest Act of 1991 (ANONYMOUS 1997a,b) and instructions of General Director 

of State Forests (ANONYMOUS 1994) within the framework of THE SYSTEM OF 

NATURE PROTECTION AND FORMATION OF NATURAL ENVIRONMENT IN 

STATE FORESTS, the latter has been result of realisation of selected topics of nature 

protection, the rational formation of the natural environment, the social expectations as 

well as the economic needs and possibilities of the country. This system is being 

accomplished through: 

1. Special forms of nature protection (nature reserves, nature monuments, ecological 

values, documentation posts, protection of protected, endangered and rare species), 

2. protection forests of general purpose (e.g. water-protecting, soil-protecting forest, 

game refuges), 

3. protection forest of special purpose (e.g. forest in area of pollution damage, 

permanent experimental plots, forest surrounding health centers, forest in cities) 

4. transition zone of reserves and national parks 

5. multi-functional forest (economic forests). 

The following functions are dominant in the above-listed groups of forests: 

– exclusively protection functions: in objects from the special forms of protection. 

The only purpose of a forester’s activity in such objects is accomplishment of the 

aims defined in the plans of protection (e.g. reserves) and preservation of their 

natural richness. 

– the leading protection function and the accompanying minor importance 

production function - in protection forests (both of general and special purpose) as 

well as in the transition zones of reserves and national parks. The production of 

wood is in this group forests of secondary importance and it is not decisive in the 

principles of management activities. 

– the productive-protection function - present in the multi-function forest. In this 

group of forest (3.3 M. ha altogether) the production function and the protection 

function are equally important. These forests fulfil the protection function 

continuously during their entire life cycle (some 100 years) while they fulfil the 

production function only a few times: on the occasions of thinning and final cut.


c) preservation of natural richness and biological diversity 

The protection of nature has been widely considered in the activity of the largest forest 

enterprise in Poland: State Forests, administering the forest belonging to the public purse 

of area equal 6.68 M. ha. Both in the General Directorate and in Regional Directorates of 

State Forests there are separate organisational units dealing with the protection of nature. 

During the last few years, a comprehensive program of educational and promotional 

activity has been developed within the framework of State Forests. Its purpose has been to 

familiarise the wide circles of society with the problems of management and protection of 

forests. Particularly sound has been the effort in the ten Forest Promotional Complexes 

(ANONYMOUS 1995b). They cover a total area of 445 000 ha and are distributed all 

over the country (Fig. 6). Forest Promotional Complexes have their own scientific-social 

Boards where foresters, self-government representatives and scientists act jointly. The 

management activity in managed forest under the administration of State Forests is carried 

out following the plans of forests management. In these documents included are, also, 

chapters dealing with nature protection. Since year 1998, every such plan has to contain a 

program of nature protection in the forest district of interest. The ever first such program 

has been prepared for Kozienice Forest District, the latter comprising the Kozienice 

Forest Promotional Complex (ANONYMOUS 1996a,b, BULiGL 1996, ZIELONY 1995). 

Kozienice Forest is one of the best studied forest areas in Poland (ZIELONY 1997). Tables: 

12-14 present selected data of the Program. 

Based on the information presented in Tables 12-14, one can figure out that a 

significantly great part of the Radom Province’s most valuable natural values are located 

in the Kozienice Forest (the Forest itself occupying some 16% of the Province 

administrative area). Among others, in the Forest area located is the only landscape park 

of the province, nearly half of the region’s reserves and a significant number of nature 

monuments. It is just the Forest where the first ecological values of the region have been 

established. Particularly many natural creatures and areas are in the terrain of State 

Forests: Tables 13 and 14 give examples - the number and acreage of reserves and the 

number of nature monuments. The ten existing reserves with their area of over 900 ha 

have contributed to the actually high value of the index of reserve-protected area ratio: 

0.78% of the total geographic area versus the region’s 0.24% or the country-wide value of 

0.38% (GUS 1997). 

Table 12: Occurrence of selected groups of organisms present in Kozienice Forest 

(BULiGL 1996) 

Group of organisms All known 

species 

Protected 

species 

Species included in 

the Red data book 

Lichens 204 71 

Mosses 94 

Vascular plants 569 41 11 

Amphibians 13 13 

Reptiles 6 6 1 

Birds 225 225* 36 

Mammals 

* - some species present temporarily 

59 32 10


Despite the rather rich factographic documentation of the natural values of Kozienice 

Forest, it is a positive phenomenon that the relatively small region, well known in Poland 

and visited by foreign visitors, has been further studied, and its forest administration 

managers do their best to direct such their activity as to not only prevent any degradation 

of the Forest but, on contrary, to enrich its resources and their diversity for the benefit of 

generations to come. It should be emphasised that the Program of Nature Protection of a 

Forest District is not a research program: it should be based mainly on the already 

available information or information collected in the course of works of the Plan of Forest 

Management. 

Figure 6: Forest promotional complexes in Poland 

1. Lasy Oliwsko-Darzlubskie 

2. Lasy Puszczy Bukowej i Goleniowskiej 

3. Bory Tucholskie 

4. Lasy Puszczy Białowieskiej 

5. Lasy Gostynińsko-Włocławskie 

6. Bory Lubuskie 

7. Lasy Rychtalskie 

8. Lasy Puszczy Kozienickiej 

9. Lasy Janowskie 

10. Lasy Beskidu Śląskiego


Table 13: Protected objects in Kozienice Forest (BULiGL 1996) 

Type of object Number of objects Area (ha) 

in entire 

Kozienice 

Forest 

in Forest 

District 

in entire 

Kozienice 

Forest 

in Forest 

District 

Reserves* 10 5 903.09 343.12 

Planned reserves 6 4 about 300 about 179 

Landscape Park 1 1 15,098 10,772 

Nature monuments 140** 87 

Ecological values 113 63 353.72 137.52 

Nesting place: black stork 

lesser spotted eagle 

roller 

19 

1 

1 

* - there were 24 reserves in year 1996 in the Province of 1888 ha area that is 0.24% of the Province total area 

** - 191 nature monuments in the entire Kozienice Forest - in all-ownership grounds. 

Table 14: Monuments of nature in Kozienice Forest (BULiGL 1996) 

Community 

12 

1 

1 

Number of monuments 

in State 

total 

Forests 

Remarks 

Jastrzêbia 7 - 

Glowaczów 18 14 including 1 lime valley 

Kozienice 18 17 

Jedlnia 2 1 

Pionki 86 81 

Pionki city 17 10 

Sieciechów - - 

Policzna 12 

Zwoleñ 17 14 

Gózd 2 - 

Garbatka 12 3 

Total 191 140 

SCIENTIFIC STUDY IN FOREST 

The scientific study carried out in Poland covers a range of topics and the study itself has 

had its long tradition. Large portion of the study deal with the problems of silviculture, 

protection and ecology of forest. The data are gathered both in permanent and temporary 

observation plots or transects. A lot of forest research plots have been established in 

national parks and nature reserves. The oldest permanent experimental plots are, e.g. 

located in Bialowieza National Park (BERNADZKI et al. 1997) and in Jata forest reserve. 

The scientific study in forest is being conducted by the staff of branch institutes, 

universities and Forestry Faculties of Agricultural Universities. In the organizational 

framework of the Forest Research Institute, a special office: the Department of Natural


Forests with its headquarters in Bialowieza, has been operating. In Polish Academy of 

Sciences, the Institute of Nature Protection in Krakow has been active. A very interesting 

comprehensive study project has been lately carried out under the auspices of the GEF 

Grant on the area of the Bialowieza Primeval Forest (PASCHALIS & ZAJACZKOWSKI 1996). 

For a few years now, scientific study has also been carried out by the staff of national 

parks. The output results of many research projects are utilised while preparing the plans 

of protection of national parks and nature reserves. 

PROGNOSIS OF NATURE PROTECTION DEVELOPMENT IN FORESTS 

The prognoses of further development of nature protection in Poland include, e.g. a more 

explicit learning and more efficient protection of our national natural richness, covering 

new objects with legal protection and tutoring society in the field of nature protection and 

rational utilisation of our natural resources. The prognoses include, also, forests. 

It is planned in Poland that another three national parks will be created within the next 

few years and a number of new reserves, out of which 726 objects are to be located on the 

area of State Forests (WROBEL 1997). A substantial increase in our knowledge is expected 

to be fact following the practice gained in the course of accomplishing the programs of 

nature protection for the managed forest. 

SUMMARY 

The presented in this paper, outline of nature protection problems in Poland as well as the 

general information on natural forest, cover exclusively selected topics of a statistical and 

information character. A lot of detailed data considering the nature protection in forest 

ecosystems can be found in publications of the Institute of Nature Protection of Polish 

Academy of Sciences, the Forest Research Institute and in a periodical ‘National Parks 

and Nature Reserves’ published by the country-wide Board of National Parks. 

REFERENCES 

ANONYMOUS (1991) The Act on Nature Protection of 16.10.1991. (In Polish). 

ANONYMOUS (1994) Decree No 30 of General Director of State Forests of 19 December 1994, on 

forest management improvement as based on ecological principles. (In Polish). 

ANONYMOUS (1995a) Minister decree from 6.01.1995 on species protection of animals. (In Polish). 

ANONYMOUS (1995b) Decree No 11 of General Director of State Forests of 14 February 1995, on 

Forest Promotional Complexes. (In Polish). 

ANONYMOUS (1995c) Minister decree from 6.04.1995 on species protection of plants. (In Polish). 

ANONYMOUS (1996a) Programme of the conservation of nature and cultural values in forest 

districts. Proceedings of seminar hold in Pionki, November 14-15, 1995. Fund. Rozwoj SGGW. 

ANONYMOUS (1996b) Instruction of drawing-up the programs of nature protection in a Forest 

District. (In Polish). 

ANONYMOUS (1997a) The Forest Act of 28.09.1991 with 1997 amendments. (In Polish).


ANONYMOUS (1997b) Forest policy of State. (In Polish). 

BERNADZKI, E. et al. (1997) The 1936 - 1993 changes in stand species composition of natural forest 

stands in the Bialowieza National Park (In Polish). Parki Narod.Rez. Przyr. 16.2. 

BOINSKI, M. (1997) Cisy Staropolskie nature reserve in Wierzchlas (In Polish). Wyd. Tow. Mil. 

Borow Tucholskich. Bydgoszcz. 

BULiGL (1996) Program of natural and cultural values protection in Kozienice Forest District. 

Unpubl. MS (In Polish). Radom. 

CZUBINSKI, Z. et al. (1977) Nature reserves in Poland. PWN Warszawa-Krakow. (In Polish). 

GLOWACINSKI, Z. (ed.). (1992) Polish red data book of animals. PWRiL, Warszawa . (In Polish). 

GRZYWACZ, A. (ed.) (1994) Polish State Policy of complex protection of forests resources. Fund. 

Rozwoj SGGW. (In Polish). 

GUS (1997) Forestry 1997. Statistical data and analyses. 

LIRO, A. et al. (1995) The concept of country-wide ecological network ECONET-POLSKA. Fund. 

IUCN Poland. Warszawa (In Polish). 

LONKIEWICZ, B. (ed.) (1996b) Conservation and sustainable use of forests in Poland. IUCN - 

Program Europy. Fund. IUCN Poland (In Polish with English Summary). 

LONKIEWICZ, B. (1996a) The map of forests biological diversity. Echa Lesne. 

OLACZEK, R. et al. (1996) Nature protection in Poland . IOS Warszawa. (In Polish). 

PASCHALIS, P. / ZAJACZKOWSKI, S. (1996) Biodiversity protection of Bialowieza Primeval Forest . 

Fund. Rozwoj SGGW. 

RADZIEJOWSKI, J. (ed.) (1996) Protected areas in Poland. IOS Warszawa. (In Polish). 

SZUJECKI, A. (1994) Natural conditions decisive for the forest policy of the XXIst century. MS. (In 

Polish). 

WIECKO, E. (ed.) (1996) Encyclopedic dictionary of forestry, wood science, nature protection and 

similar fields. Wyd. SGGW. (In Polish). 

WROBEL, J. (1997) Nature protection in forests under legal protection with particular emphasis on 

nature reserves. In: Protection of biological diversity in forests. POLEKO Poznan. IBL 

Warszawa. (In Polish). 

ZARZYCKI, K. / KAZMIERCZAKOWA, R (eds) (1993) Polish red data book of plants. Ins. Ochr. Przyr. 

PAN, Krakow. (In Polish). 

ZIELONY, R. (ed.) (1995) Directions of nature protection in managed forest. Fund. Rozwoj SGGW. 

(In Polish). 

ZIELONY, R. (ed.) (1997) Kozienice Forest - a monograph. Wyd. SGGW, Warszawa. (In Polish). 

The Board of National Parks Polish 1997: National parks. National Parks in Poland. Warszawa- 

Bialowieza


Appendix A 

Minimum dimension of domestic trees and shrub species nature monuments 

No. Species Diameter at breast height (cm) 

(1,3 m above the ground level) 

Circumference 

(cm) 

1. Betula pendula 70 220 

2. Betula pubescens 70 220 

3. Fagus sylvatica 100 314 

4. Prunus avium 30 94 

5. Cerasus avium 30 94 

6. Quercus sessilis 100 314 

7. Quercus robur 120 380 

8. Crataegus sp. 30 94 

9. Carpinus betulus 60 190 

10. Pyrus communis 50 160 

11. Malus sylvestris 30 94 

12. Sorbus aucuparia 50 160 

13. Acer pseudoplatanus 80 250 

14. Fraxinus excelsior 80 250 

15. Abies alba 100 314 

16. Acer campestre 50 160 

17. Acer platanoides 70 220 

18. Corylus avellana 30 * 94 

19. Tilia cordata 100 314 

20. Tilia platyphyllos 100 314 

21. Larix europaea 100 314 

22. Larix polonica 100 314 

23. Populus tremula 70 220 

24. Pinus sylvestris 100 314 

25. Picea excelsa 100 314 

26. Rhamnus cathartica 30 94 

27. Ulmus scabra 70 220 

28. Ulmus campestris 70 220 

29. Ulmus effusa 70 220 

30. Salix alba 100 314 

31. Salix fragilis 100 314 

32. Populus alba 120 380 

33. Populus nigra 120 380 

* - now 20 cm is suggested


Appendix B 

CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM OF RESERVES IN POLAND 

1. According to main object of protection: 

• Fl - floristic 

• Fi - phytocoenotic 

• BF - biocoenotic and physiocoenotic 

• Gg - geological and soil 

• Ke - ecological landscapes 

• Nu - artificial plantations 

• Ku - cultural 

2. According to main environmental type 

• L - forest* 

• £ - meadows 

• W - inland waters 

• T - peatlands 

• H - hylophytic vegetation 

• Wd - dunes 

• Sp - underground 

• Sk - rocks 

• U - plantations 

• M - mixed - type 

* subtypes: 

– lni - lowland broadleaved forest 

– lgp - highland broadleaved forest 

– lmn - lowland mixed-broadleaved forest 

– lmg - highland mixed-broadleaved forest 

– bni - lowland coniferous forest 

– bgp - highland coniferous forest 

– bmn - lowland mixed-coniferous forest 

– bmg - highland mixed-coniferous forest


FOREST RESERVES AND THEIR RESEARCH IN ROMANIA 

ABSTRACT 

by Gheorghe Florian BORLEA * 

A natural forest is a very good example to illustrate the concept of sustainable 

development. Forest area in Romania covers 6.356,000 ha (27 % of the total land area of 

the country), and the proportion of natural forests still remains important. Natural forest 

composition model is the main goal of the present-day forest management plans. There 

exists a tradition in nature conservation but the legislative system for nature protection in 

general must be improved, and very valuable areas must be included. The concept of 

forest conservation has evolved from the genetic conservation of forest tree species to the 

conservation of biodiversity in forest ecosystems. There are only few researches recorded 

in natural forests here. The need of forest conservation appeared also as a reaction to the 

previous extensive silvicultural methods which have dramatically disturbed the forest 

ecosystems. Forest conservation has been also supported by the new legislation (The 

Forestry Code /1996), and by the activity of the ‘Progresul Silvical Society’ 1 members. 


Total forest area in Romania consists of 6.366,000 ha from which 6.245,000 ha is covered 

by forest vegetation (27% of total land area of the country). Previously, 70% of the 

present-day territory was covered by forest (CHIRITA 1986). Romania has very important 

biodiversity resources: 3,100 native species of plants, 60 native tree species, 10 groups of 

natural forest formations, and 150 types of forest ecosystems (DONITA, CHIRITA and 

STANESCU 1990). 

Forest composition is varied. Conifers make up 31% (23% spruce, 5% fir-tree, and other 

conifers 3%), beech 31%, oak 18%, other hard broad-leaved trees 15%, and soft broadleaved 

trees 5%. The average growing stock is 215 m 3 /ha (36% beech), and the average 

growth 5.6 m 3 /year/ha. The harvested wood volume was 24 - 27 million m 3 in 1951-1976, 

22 M m 3 in 1987, and 14.8 M m 3 in 1997. Afforestation of inferior land areas was carried 

out on 1,100 ha in 1996, and on 900 ha in 1997. The realisation of natural forest 

composition model is the main goal of the present-day forest management plans. 

* Dr. G.F.B., Forest Research and Management Institute - ICAS, Timisoara, Romania 

1 Association founded in 1886 in order to promote sustainable forestry.

68 Forest Reserves and their Research in Romania 

The Romanian silviculture was born and influenced in the context of French and German 

silvicultural school. The first Silvicultural Code, issued in 1881, stipulated the obligation 

of continuity principles and the necessity of skilled forest administration and management 

personnel for the state owned forest property (created in 1863). Essential peculiarities of 

the natural relief led to the development of a specific silviculture (GIURGIU 1995): 

– the excessive fragility and sensitivity of the geographical space determined the 

immediate modification of the environmental factors. 

– the dominance of uneven relief. 

– the relatively poor water resources (1700 m 3 /capita). 

– a very capricious climate (cyclic draughts 1894-1905, 1918-1930, 1942-1953, 

1983-1993; big storms...). 

The simultaneous existence of natural and artificial forests has given the possibility to 

make comparison. The negative impact of dramatic climate changes upon artificial forest 

is obvious mainly in introduced coniferous monocultures but also in the case of 

deforestation (clear cuttings) in mountains: 

THE HISTORY OF NATURE RESERVES ESTABLISHMENT 

The whole history and civilisation of the local population was continuously connected to 

the forest covering the main part of the land area. 

Starting with 1905, naturalists and foresters were concerned about protecting the nature, 

and the first reference to the forest protection was made in the Constitution in 1907. In 

1912, the ‘Progresul Silvical Society’ (professional association of foresters) proposed to 

the authorities, a project of National Parks like in the US of America. Due to economical 

reasons it was impossible to make it happen. In 1928, at the first Congress of naturalists 

here, Emil RACOVITA presented the Nature Monuments Law Project. In Romania adopted 

in 1930 at the same time with the Nature Monuments Commission Foundation. 

The legislative system concerning forest conservation includes also the Forest Protection 

Law (1935). In 1938, Marin DRACEA, mentioned, "we didn't alternate the original 

structure of our vegetation through forest species dislocation, and by dramatic changes of 

the natural mixtures". 

An important step forward for the forest conservation was made in 1935, when the first 

National Park - Retezat (> 11,000 ha) mainly afforested, was governed by Law. 

In the period 1930-1943, 36 natural reserves were constituted (total area 15,000 ha). 

After the World War II, a new Nature Protection Law was adopted and the number of 

natural reserves increased to 130 (75,000 ha total area). Unfortunately in 1970 the 

administration rules of nature reserves were modified and the Retezat National Park 

administration was dismissed. The result was the disturbance of the nature protection 

activity in the entire country. Projects and studies on National Parks System Management 

were issued during 1973-1978. Important studies were developed by the Geographical 

Institute and the Institute of Biological Research Bucharest concerning natural flora and 

fauna.


The criteria for the zonal function of the forests were published officially in 1957 and 

have been continuously improved since then. A new Silvical Code was adopted in 1962, 

but in 1963 the government directed (by special orders) the silviculture to clear cutting 

and coniferous extension out of their natural area. The economic pressure on the forest 

has increased at macro-level due to wood industry development and exports, and at 

micro-level due to population growth, and the large utilisation of wood for fuel. Starting 

in 1976; the specialists succeeded to add to the Law (besides some undesirable measures 

against sustainability) a long-term plan for forest conservation (1976-2010), as the main 

result of both the pressure of international organisms and the conclusion that deforestation 

played a very important role in the catastrophic floods of 1970-1975. 

The ‘Management Norms’ of 1986 stipulated the term of ‘special regime of conservation 

for the natural forests’ (intensive treatments, excluding clear cuttings and maintaining the 

forest natural type). The multiple functions of the forests were pointed out in the 

‘Management Norms’ of 1988. 

The National System of Natural Parks and Reservations was initiated in 1990 (12 

National Parks with an overall area of 340,400 ha were formed or will be formed, having 

more than 80% of natural forest area each). 

The ‘Strategy of Forestry Development’ of 1995, reviewed in 1997 and in 1998, is 

considered to be based on the ‘conservation of forest fund providing the ecological 

equilibrium and environment protection’. The Silvical Code of 1996 stipulates that highforest 

regime will be generally adopted in order to assure the forest sustainability. The 

Law of Environment of 1995 stipulates the necessary regulations in order to ensure a 

sustainable development of natural resources. 


Unlike the Central European countries, where the forest landscape was radically 

modified, Romania is favoured by the fact that in its mountain and foothill zones, natural 

forest still exists. 

Concerning the terms used in the present paper some explanations are necessary. At the 

Geneva meeting (1995), a provisional list of descriptive forest indicators was prepared by 

the General Coordinating Committee of the Helsinki Process. The following definitions 

were given: 

– virgin forest = untouched forest: an area that has never been disturbed by human 

intervention, with natural structure and dynamics. The soil, climate, entire flora, 

fauna and life process have not been disturbed or changed by logging, grazing and 

direct or indirect anthropogenic influences. 

In Romania the term ‘quasi-virgin forest’ is also used, in order to delimit former 

virgin forests where sporadic extraction was practised, but the typical uneven-aged 

structure was not affected. 

– natural forest = a forest which has evolved as a sequence of natural succession 

but still showing anthropogenic influences; a forest which was developed from 

unmanaged pasture or from fallow land.


The present-day estimation of virgin and natural forest area in Romania can be done 

using: 

– the ‘accessibility’ of a forest (or an ‘isolation degree’ of stands) 

– ’the actual state of forest types’: natural, derived, artificial or indefinite; (almost 

70% of the Romanian forests still maintain their natural appearance), 

– the age of stands (the existence of a normal proportion of trees aged over 120 

years). 

According to the last forest inventory (1985) the area of forests without accessibility 

(distance from the road >5km) was 126,860 ha (representing 2% of the total forest area), 

and 824,000 ha (13% of the total forest area) were forests with relatively bad accessibility 

(distance from the road between 2.1-5 km). The present-day official list of protected areas 

in Romania must be reviewed (it includes a number of 15 virgin and quasi-virgin forests 

protected as forest reserves, with the total area of 3,866 ha). A tree seed sources catalogue 

(in situ conservation) was drawn up (ENESCU 1986) and reviewed in 1997, with 2,313 

seed stands (the total area 70,176 ha), excepted from cuttings; an important part of which 

can be included in the natural forest categories. 

A short description (composition, structure, value, location) of 67 of the most valuable 

virgin and natural forests is presented in Table 1 (Appendix A), and in Figure 1. 

The concept of the National System of Natural Parks (OARCEA 1981, STOICULESCU 1995) 

includes the extension of the protected areas from very small areas to large ecological 

units (taking into account that in the representative forest areas the disturbed forest areas 

are of the first generation following the virgin forest, and their natural balance was not 

very much disturbed. The main ideas promoted by this concept are: 

– the extension of conservation in large areas, 

– internal zoning; 

– a maximum representativeness of autochthonous forest ecosystems. 

– unitary management for the entire system of 13 National Parks. 

In 1994, 13 forest areas of 397,400 ha were officially recognised as National Parks by the 

government, and more than 130,000 ha of integral reserves, but an administrativemanagerial 

team doesn't exist in practice. The management of these areas is still the 

responsibility of the local forest administration. 

The classification of natural objects (STOICULESCU and OARCEA 1989) in order to be 

protected by Law is: 

– National Parks 

• established by law 

• proposed 

– Biosphere reservations (proposed) 

– Protected areas 

– Natural reservations 

• mixed 

• forest 

• dendrological parks 

• botanical 

• zoological


• palaeontological 

• geological 

• spelaeological 

• scientific 

• landscape conservation 

• nature monuments 

The classification of protected areas inside a forest area (STOICULESCU and OARCEA 

1994) (Figure 2) includes: 

1. National Parks: 

– established by law (Retezat) 

– provisionally established (11 Parks - Ministry Order 7/1990) 

– planned: a) first stage 1997-2000 (Figure 2) (a) 

b) second stage after 2000 (Figure 2) (b) 

2. Biosphere reservations: 

– established at national level 

– established at international level (UNESCO-1980): Pietrosul Rodnei and 

Rosca-Letea (Danube Delta). 

The reviewed classification of National Parks and protected areas (STOICULESCU and 

OARCEA 1997) includes (Figure 3): 

1. National Parks: 

– established by law (Retezat) 

– provisionally established (11 Parks) 

2. Natural Parks - planned 

3. Biosphere reservations: 

– established by law 

– established at international level (UNESCO-1980): Pietrosul Rodnei and 

Rosca-Letea (Danube Delta). 

MOHANU, ARDELEAN and GEORGESCU (1993) described a total number of 401 natural 

reservations in Romania classified as: 

– National Park Retezat, 

– complex reservations, 

– forest and flower reservations, 

– fauna reservations, 

– geological and geomorphological reservations; 

– spelaeological reservations, 

– palaeontological reservations; 

The same authors present also relict, endemic and rare protected plants; individual 

valuable trees and endemic, relict and rare protected animals.


Figure 1: Virgin and natural forests in Romania (Romania-Forest Map; author N.Donita- 

1990) 

Virgin and natural forests 

in Romania 

UKRAINE 


Forest reserves andprotected areas 

MOLDOVA 

HUNGARY 

BLACK SEA 

BUCHAREST 

YUGOSLAVIA 

BULGARIA


Figure 2: Protected areas inside the forest fund (STOICULESCU and OARCEA - Forest 

Research and Management Institute ICAS, 1994) 

National Parks: I - established by law; II - provisional (established by Ministry 

Order 7/1990); III - planned to be established till the year 2000 and afterwards. 

Biosphere Reservations: IV - established at the national and international level 

(since 1980). 

HUNGARY 

YUGOSLAVIA 


BULGARIA 

MOLDOVA 

I II III IV 

BLACK SEA


Figure 3: National parks and protected areas in Romania (STOICULESCU and OARCEA - 

Forest Research and Management Institute ICAS-1997) 

HUN GARY 

YUGO SLAVIA 


BULGARIA 

M OLDO VIA 

National Parks: Established by law and by Ministry Order 7/1990. 

National Parks: Planned to be established after the year 2000. 

Natural Parks and Biosphere Reservations: established by law, projected in 

1994, planned to be established till the year 2000, and those established at the 

international level in 1980. 

BLACK SEA


The integral reserves area was increased to 14% of the total forest area (Figure 4) 

(GIURGIU 1995). 

The tool used in order to promote the forest conservation and sustainability by POPESCU- 

ZELETIN (1957) was the ‘functional zoning’ of the forests. This first zonal functioning 

includes 2 groups: 

– Group I: ‘protection forest’ with 5 zones (water protection, soil protection against 

erosion, forests of social interest, forest reserves and nature monuments) with the 

aim to protect the most sensitive element of each forest ecosystem. 

Up till now the functional zoning was developed (GIURGIU 1995). The protection forest 

area was increased almost five times (Figure 5). This is explained by the protected areas 

extension, and by the modification of the functional zoning criteria (1986 and 1988). 

Actually there are two ‘functional groups’ of forests (Forestry Code 1996): 

– Group I: forests with special function to protect the environment: water, soil 

climate, strategic objectives, recreation, conservation of biodiversity in protected 

areas, reservations and National Parks. 

– Group II: forests for biomass production and environmental protection (area of 

Group II is decreasing). (Figure 4) 

In Figure 5 we can see the increase of Group I forest area, and the dominance of forests 

for soil (19%) and water protection (18%). 

Concerning the protection forests (Group I) there are two situations: 

– when any intervention is forbidden, 

– when cuttings are permitted but the protective function remains intact (60% of the 

protection forests). 

Ideas to improve the actual system were presented by GIURGIU (1995). A proposal for a 

new system of forest functional zoning into 58 categories (55 for the first group, and 3 for 

the second group) was also presented. The goal to include the total area of natural forests 

into the protected area is also stipulated. Natural forest areas for the main forest species 

are presented in Figure 6 (GIURGIU 1995). 

Figure 4: Dynamics of production-protection forests and integral reserves in Romania 

area (ha) 

90 

80 

70 

60 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

production and 

protection forest 

integral reserves 

1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1984 1993 1998/2000 

year


Figure 5: Dynamics of protection forests in Romania 

area (ha) 

70 

60 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

water protection 

climate protection 

protected areas and reserves 

soil protection 

recreation 

1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1984 1993 1998/2000 

years 

Figure 6: Area of natural forests / main forest species in Romania 

area (×1000ha) 

160 

140 

120 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

0 

spruce forests fir forests beech forests sessile oak forests 

structure 

uneven age relative uneven age


THE DEVELOPMENT OF RESEARCH IN NATURAL FORESTS 

From the very beginning the scientific silviculture influenced the frequency and 

originality of natural forests in the Romanian Carpathians (recorded by ANTORESCU 1892, 

FROLICH 1933, RADULESCU 1937, SABAU 1937, PRODAN 1940, DRACEA 1942). (after 

BORLEA, RADU and HERNEA 1997). 

References on the same subject matter were made in different European forestry 

publications by MULLER (1929), FROLICH (1954) and MAYER (1984) (after BORLEA, 

RADU and HERNEA 1997). Systematic researches are recorded locally by POPESCU- 

ZELETIN and DISSESCU (1964) in PENTELEU and CENUSA (1986 and 1992). Recent studies 

recorded 37,000 ha of natural quasi-virgin forests (mainly beech, and also spruce, mixed 

forests, and oaks in Banat, located in the districts: Bozovici, Nera, Caransebes, Rusca- 

Montana, Lugoj, Lipova, Lunca Timisului, Mehadia Smejkal, Bandiu, Visoiu - 1995). 

In Romania the actual area of main tree species natural forests is still important and 

presented in Figure 6 - GIURGIU (1995 - Forest Inventory). DONITA, CHIRITA, STANESCU 

(1990), described 150 forest ecosystem types in Romania. 

Methods in research of natural forests in Romania 

The methods used by researchers in the Romanian natural forests consist of: 

– sampling plots for the most representative forest type of sufficient surface size 

from 0.2 ha (SMEJKAL et al. 1995) to 0.1 - l.0 ha (PAPAVA 1979), and presenting 

the structure by integral inventory of the plot with main emphasis on tree-layer 

structure. 

– systematic sampling plots (‘grille’ type) for each structural phase (as described by 

LIEBUNDGUT 1959). 

For the situation of spruce limit natural forests, CENUSA (1992) considers that the 

diameter of circular plots must be between 50 - 100 m. For beech and oak natural forests 

the diameter of circular plots must be 50% larger (SMEJKAL et al. 1995). 

– method of transects with a continuous flora inventory following the altitudinal 

distribution of vegetation. 

In Romania there are no particular methodologies in studies. Different researchers follow 

previous ‘models’ from literature. 

In comparative studies of genetic variability between natural and managed forest elmoffspring 

population, a superior level of genetic variability was observed, both the 

morphological characters and the resistance to parasite attack (BORLEA 1996). 

Natural spruce forests 

The natural spruce forests, studied by GIURGIU (1974), show a large age variation in the 

small diameter categories compared to the large diameter categories; a similarity to the 

theoretic ideal diameter curve for virgin forest. The age-class frequency curve shows 

more maximum levels due to more regeneration waves. In Romania the characteristics of 

spruce natural forests are: 236 - 1565 trees/ha, diameter 16 - 100 cm, volume 244 - 

700 m 3 /ha, and height 25 - 30 m. The stability of spruce natural (virgin) forests is high. 

The spruce natural forest in Bucovina showed similar structural phases as described by 

LEIBUNDGUT (1959).


Mixed beech-coniferous natural forests 

The research recorded by PAPESCU-ZELETIN and PETRESEU in 1956, and DISSESCU in 

1964 (after VLAD, CHIRITA, DONITA and PETRESCU 1997) in spruce-beech-fir mixed 

forests shows no correlation between minimum - maximum age and diameter. Only the 

average age is positively correlated with diameter in range 30 - 65 cm. A beech can 

activate its growth even at the age of 130 - 140 years, and a fir at 100-150 years (e.g. a fir 

tree 465 years old had 6 cm diameter at the age of 90). The age of shrub-layer level varied 

between 20 - 120 years. The authors mentioned that due to ‘continuous feed-back 

processes’ this forest type maintained the initial structure. The regeneration in this type of 

mixture is possible only in open areas after old trees die. The ‘alternation of species’ in 

beech-fir mixtures in Semenic Mountains was described by BORLEA (1989). BANDIU 

(1977) explains this phenomenon as a result of differences in species radiation demands 

concerning light quality. The wood volume is high (600 - 1100 m 3 ), maximum tree-height 

is 50 - 60 m for fir and spruce, and 35 - 36 m for beech, and an average tree-height is 

40 m for fir, and 32 - 36 m for beech. The stability is very high. 

Beech natural forest 

In the Semenic mountains (6,000 ha) natural beech forests still exist. Some authors 

(RADULESCU 1937, TARZIU 1970, PAPAVA 1977) studied natural beech in Romania, and 

the main conclusions are: the diameter curve is similar to the theoretical curve for 

selective cuttings, there is no age-diameter correlation, and only average age-diameter 

correlation is significant and positive. There is a positive correlation between tree-height 

(interval 22 - 36 m) and diameter categories (from 39 - 62 cm). The fructification 

variability is very large, and fructification periodicity is from 3 - 4 years to 6 - 8 years, 

and strongly correlated with the altitude. The growth at the age of 200 years is similar to 

that of 80 - 100 years (PAPAVA 1977). The volume varies in range of 322 - 1195 m 3 , and 

the number of trees/ha is between 160 - 588. Stability is extremely high 

Oak natural forests and oak-mixed natural forests 

Oak natural forests were very much disturbed by anthropic activities. The oak-mixed 

natural forests have similar structure to that of the Bialoweza forests, with the exception 

of spruce (DONITA and PURCELEAN 1975, VLAD, CHIRITA, DONITA and PETRESCU 1997). 

The spatial structure consists of three levels: lower layer with hornbeam, intermediate 

layer with lime, cherry-tree, elm, sycamore maple, and superior layer with species of oak, 

ash, and sometimes elm or ash. The regeneration of oak is possible in these conditions 

(according to PASCOVSCHI 1967) due to their longevity (2 - 3 times higher than other 

species from this type of mixed forests). 

The comparison of natural forest and managed forest 

There were no systematic studies of comparing natural forests with the managed ones in 

Romania. Sporadically, different authors mentioned comparison of different qualitative or 

quantitative aspects, underlining the superiority of natural forest. There is only one 

exception: PAPAVA (1979) mentioned that the quality of wood is better in even-aged 

stands than in natural forests, and the absence of parasites is more obvious. This must be


discussed because at the same diameter class the age could be very different, and the 

action of parasites is a result of many interacting factors. 

Concerning other qualitative aspects, especially the genetic variability, the superiority of 

natural forests is obvious (the genetic variability of elm in natural population is superior 

to that of elm in managed forest (BORLEA 1996). 

THE PRESENT STATE OF RESEARCH ON NATURAL FORESTS IN ROMANIA 

A very important process of reform started in the entire Romanian forestry, both in 

institutional organisation and property regime. The specialists' efforts are focused on the 

establishment of the legal status for the natural forests and natural reservations in general. 

Actually the research network is engaged in identifying the entire area of potential forest 

reserves, and in including these areas into the protected areas system (project leaders Dr. 

Cristian STOICULESCU ICAS Bucuresti and Dr. Zeno OARCEA). Regional researches are 

recorded in Bucovina (spruce natural forests - Radu CENUSA , ICAS Campulung- 

Moldovenesc) and have just started in Banat (beech natural forests and natural forests 

with elm - Gheorghe Florian BORLEA, ICAS Timiosara). 

CONCLUSIONS 

In Romania the theoretical concepts of forest conservation were considerably developed 

in the forestry legislation from the first regulation concerning forestry to the present-day 

legislation (Forestry Code - 1995, the Law of Environment - 1996). 

The functional zoning represents the instrument used by the foresters in order to promote 

the conservation and sustainability of a forest. A continuous growth of the protection 

forest areas was recorded (from 12.7% of the total forest area in 1955, to 60% nowadays). 

This requires an adequate system of silvicultural intensive methods. 

Social problems, as well as insufficient presentation of information to people on 

sustainability in forestry, can produce disturbances in the effort for forest conservation 

and sustainable development. In the last decades the situation of forest protection has 

continuously improved; this year it represents 62% of the total forest area. After 1998, 

when the 4 th consecutive forest management plan will be completed, we expect new 

criteria for functional zoning. 

The simultaneous existence of natural and artificial forests gave the possibility to compare 

the two. The negative impact of dramatic climate changes in the case of artificial forest is 

obvious, mainly in introduced coniferous monocultures. Deforestation (clear cuttings) in 

mountainous land has also totally disturbed the ecological balance. 

Different authors presenting a classification of natural reserves in Romania use terms 

already mentioned in literature. Sometimes the general evolution of nature protection law 

has generated confusion in terms. The explanation could be that scientists are actually 

involved in trying to get as much natural areas under law protection as possible, and then 

clarify formal aspects. In presenting the problems of nature protected areas more accuracy 

is required. Important legislative changes are expected in the near future in order to 

clarify the status of large nature protected areas.


The present-day methods of research in natural forests must be improved. The most 

important quality of natural forest is its normal functionality given by the interaction of 

ecosystem components. The natural forest is a complete ecosystem. The research methods 

of a natural forest must be extended to each component of an ecosystem. 

The description of virgin and natural forest types in Romania can provide scientific 

information and approaches, and thus can also offer ‘models’ for the forest of the future. 

REFERENCES 

BANDIU, C. (1977) Lumina ca facfor stabilizator al compozitiei ecosistemelor de amestec de brad cu 

fag. Padurea si spatiile verzi in prezent si perspective. Cluj-Napoca. 

BORLEA, G. F. (1996) Cercetari privind rezistenta ulmlor autohtoni la grafioza - PhD thesis, 

University of Brasov. 

CENUSA, R. (1986) Structura si stabilitara unei paduri naturale de molid din cordrul secular 

Slatioara, Revista Padurilor, 101, nr.4, 185-189. 

CENUSA, R. (1992) Cercetari privind volumul, structura si succesiunea ecosistemelor forestiere din 

Nordul Carpatilor (Calimani si Giumalaau), Ph D thesis, ASAS Bucharest. 

DONITA, N. / CHIRITA, C./ STANESCU, V., eds. (1990) Tipuri de ecosisteme forestiere din Romania, 

ICAS, seria II, Bucharest. 

GIURGIU, V. et al. (1995) Zonarea functionala a padurilor din Romania, manuscript ICAS, 

Bucuresti. 

LEIBUNDGUT, H. (1959) Uber der Zweck Metodik der Struktur-und Zuwachanalyse von Urwalden, 

Schw. Zeitschr. Forstw, 110, 3. 

MOHANU, G. / ARDELEAN, A. / GEORGESCU. P. (1993) Rezervatii si monumente ale naturii din 

Romania, Editura Scaiul, Bucuresti. 

OARCEA, Z. (1981) Sistemul National de Parcuri si Rezervatii, ICAS, manuscript, Bucuresti. 

PASCOVSCHI, ST. (1967) Succesiunea speciilor forestiere, Ed. Ceres, Bucaresi. 

PAPAVA, A. (1979) Cercetari privind fundamentarea telurilor de gospodarire pentru padurile de fag 

din Banat, Univ. Brasov. 

SMEJKAL, G. / BANDIU, C. / VISOIU, D. (1995) Padurea seculara, Editura Mirton. Timisoara. 

STOICELESCU, C. / OARCEA, Z. (1989) Natural objectives established and proposed in forest areas, 

ICAS, Bucharest. 

STOICELESCU, C. (1998) Reffering to the forest biodiversity conservation in protected areas, Padurea 

Noastra, 359-360, (6-8). 

TARZIU, D. (1970) Cercetari privind conditile de aplicare a tratamentului taierilor succesive in 

fagetele din Masibul Parang si posibilitati de ameliorare in viitor, Ph D thesis, Univ. Brasov. 

VLAD, I. / CHIRITA, C. / DONITA, N. / PETRESCU, L. (1997) Silvicultura pe baze ecosistemice, Editura 

Academiei Romane, Bucuresti.


Appendix A

82 Forest Reserves and their Research in Romania

COST Action E4: Forest Reserves Research Network 83

84 Forest Reserves and their Research in Romania


Appendix B 

Table 2: Dendrometrical elements of virgin forests (Different authors) 

Region Composition Height 

m 

Diameter 

cm 

No. of 

Trees/ha 

Volume 

m 3 /ha 

Author 

Limit Spruce Forests 

Retezat Mo 15 23 1565 525 

Calimani Mo Pic 13-15 18-33 1415 337 Bindiu 

Calimani Mo Pic 18-22 28-38 425 244 Donita, 1989 

Calimani Mo 16-70 390 275 Rubner, 1934 

Spruce Forests 

Valea Dambovitei Mo 21-100 431 517 Rubner, 1934 af. 

Antonescu 

Bosnia Mo 26-90 236 606 Rubner, 1934 

Alpii calcarosi (Austria) Mo 25 500 648 Zukrigl, 1970 

Alpii de Est (Austria) Mo 25-30 400-700 Maver, 1984 

Mixed Beech-Coniferous Forests 

Carpatii Sud-Estici Br Fa 16-100 164 364 Rubner, 1934 

Parang Br Fa 36 M 56 420 952 Tirziu, 1970 

Sasso Fratino (Italy) Br Fa 40-32 385 1162 Hofmann, 1970 

Salajka (Czechoslovakia) Br Fa 113 482 Prusa, 1970 

Curcova uvala (Yugoslavia) Br Fa 40-34 8-145 557 1113 Plavsic, 1970 

Calimani Mo Br Fa 10-100 287 568 Rubner, 1934 

Campulung Muscel Mo Br Fa 38 21-100 405 665 Rubner af. 

Antonescu 

Parang Mo Br Fa 33 M 54 660 1013 Tirziu, 1970 

Alpii calcarosi (Austria) Mo Br Fa 40-30 M 75 630 Zukrigl, 1970 

Beech Forests 

Carpatii Sud-Estici Fa 16-100 160 322 Rubner, 1934 

Carpati Fa 800-900 Radulescu,1937 

Carpatii Meridionali Fa 400-500 Radulescu, l937 

Banat Fa 747 Radulescu, l937 

Parang (14 arb.) Fa 28-35 M 50-76 316-588 745-927 Tirziu, 1970 

Banat (14 arb. pe soluri 

profunde) 

Fa 31-40 M 37-65 146-373 601-1195 Papava, 1977 

Banat (14 arb. pe soluri 

scheletice) 

Fa 29-33 M 34-53 180-392 553-778 Papava, 1977


Appendix C 

Table 3: The age variation of spruce on diameter categories in mixed (fir-beech-spruce) 

virgin forests (after POPESCU-ZELETIN and PETRESCU, 1956) 

Diameter cm 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 

Number of trees 3 8 14 14 15 16 8 5 9 4 1 

Minimum age 143 127 145 145 142 134 165 171 153 167 

Average age 147 161 166 175 177 189 189 219 191 210 175 

Maximum age 155 207 219 223 225 223 232 267 237 289 

Table 4: Number of trees in mixed fir-spruce-beech forests (after POPESCU-ZELETIN and 

PETRESCU, 1956) 

Plot V1 V2 T1 T2 

Year 1949 1955 1949 1955 1949 1955 1949 1955 

Number of trees 1600 1350 1150 800 1970 1010 1290 880


THE BROWN BEAR IN SLOVENIA - NATURAL HERITAGE 

OR A NUISANCE? 

The problems of the conservation of large predators in the cultural 

landscape - the case of the brown bear in Slovenia 

ABSTRACT 

by Miha ADAMIČ * 

Due to persecution and near extermination of the brown bear and other large predators in 

the 19 th and in the first half of the 20 th century, these were put on the Red list of 

threatened animals in Slovenia, and are protected yearlong since October 1993. 

Regardless of the legal protection of the brown bear, including moderate yearly quota 

harvesting system, the specie was faced with new threats, triggered off by the impacts of 

particular forms of human economy. In accordance with the practice in European Union, 

livestock support is given to people interested in sheep-breeding. Current stock of sheep 

in Slovenia is estimated at approximately 60,000 animals, and projected increase is 

expected to be at 92,000 sheep in 2003. With range expansion of the brown bear as well 

as the lynx and the wolf from south-central Slovenia, since their protection in 1993, the 

risks of predation have been transferred into the west and north-west part of the country. 

In extensive dinaric and alpine areas where sheep-farmers are not accustomed to the 

presence of the brown bear on inadequately protected pastures, the extent of damage has 

been increasing since 1993. In 1998 the state compensation payments for large predator 

damage to livestock exceeded US$ 160,000. The state supported livestock projects do not 

put an obligatory use of predator-safe fences and other protective tools, therefore State 

Agencies are in fact mutually responsible for increased predation upon insufficiently 

protected flocks. According to projected increase of sheep stock in Slovenia new pasture 

areas will have to be created in yet unaffected parts of large carnivore range. New zones 

of conflicts in the field of large predator conservation management will also appear in 

Slovenia. Although Slovenia is a small country, the way of life and the source of income 

for local inhabitants differ a lot. Large carnivores have been declared as a part of natural 

heritage, and for many inhabitants of Slovenia can also be a nuisance. The State 

Agencies, which are responsible for launching effective mitigation programs in the 

predator-affected areas, will have to take this into account. 

* Prof. Dr. M.A., Department of Forestry and Renewable Forest Resources, Biotechnical Faculty, University of 

Ljubljana, PO Box 2995, 1001 Ljubljana, Slovenia

88 The Brown Bear in Slovenia - Natural Heritage or a Nuisance? 


Slovenia is one of the few European countries with a preserved stock of large predators, 

the brown bear (Ursus arctos), the wolf (Canis lupus), and the lynx (Lynx lynx). The last 

species was re-introduced in 1973, about 100 years since its extermination in the 19 th 

century. According to older data on the history of large predators in Slovenia in the period 

between the mid-18 th century and the end of World War I, it is evident that despite 

unaffected habitats in that period, all the three species were nearly exterminated. This 

important historical lesson is to be taken into account in current and future projects on 

conservation management of problematic wildlife species, which compete with humans in 

the utilisation of the same resources. Human aversion or acceptance might therefore be 

nearly as important as preserved species habitats. 

The brown bear and other large predators are in today’s Europe among rare (or vanishing) 

species, a valuable part of the natural heritage and biotic diversity. In Slovenia all the 

three species are protected under the Decree on the protection of rare and endangered 

animal species in Slovenia, adopted by the Parliament of Slovenia in October 1993. 

Slovenian brown bear population genotype is most suitable for the recolonization of the 

Alps. This might be achieved either by natural spreading of the population towards northwest 

or by direct human support by translocation of live-captured animals in new habitats. 

Only viable populations can cope with increasing pressure, which affect not only 

population size and structure but also suitability of habitats. Increasing pressure upon 

populations is among important triggers that set off permanent changes in the patterns of 

species dispersion. The movements of the brown bear are, due to circulation abilities of 

the species, hardly to be controlled by humans. The extension of the population of brown 

bears out of the core area will therefore be presumably present in Slovenia in future, too. 

Taking into account predictions on spatial extension, the core management area of the 

brown bear with about 3000 sq. km, established in 1966, will be thus too small to ensure a 

long term persistence of a viable population, independently of the surrounding areas. The 

ideas and legislature on the protection of the brown bear in Slovenia, devised in the mid- 

60s are therefore unsuitable for current purposes. A new conservation strategy with 

implemented facts on population dynamics is to be designed and adopted in every day’s 

life as soon as possible. Among the first steps to be taken are to increase the area of bear 

conservation. 

Therefore the conservation of a viable bear population in Slovenia is not only in the 

national but also European interest. Only proper predictions and mitigations of conflicts 

among humans and the brown bear, as well as other large predators, will make the 

implementation of the conservation goals easier and more effective. 

THE BROWN BEAR - NATURAL HERITAGE OR A NUISANCE? IT DEPENDS ON THE WAY OF 

LIFE AND THE PLACE OF LIVING. 

Slovenia represents the north-western edge of extended Balkan-Dinaric population range 

of the brown bear and the wolf. The population of the brown bear is viable and highly 

reproductive. Natural, non-hunting mortality and yearly rates of hunter-killed bears do not 

exceed the yearly reproduction rates. This is among important triggers that set off 

continuous westward extension of the population range and penetrations of brown bears


into the Alps. Opportunistic food strategies, circulation abilities and cryptic behaviour in 

the vicinity of human settlements, allow the species to penetrate even into densely 

populated and intensively used parts of human habitats. Man-made obstacles pose no 

serious problems for the species to be surmounted. Recent forms of land use in the 

cultural landscape are poorly compatible with basic principles of conservation of viable 

populations of problematic wildlife species, especially those with a large distribution 

range and those causing severe damage to human property, provoking fear and aversion 

among people. It also means that what might be a valuable part of natural heritage for 

some could be a nuisance for others, depending on their source of income and the place of 

living. 

Accelerated penetrations of brown bears into densely settled areas of north-western 

Slovenia in the post-1990 period have generated new problems to conservation 

management of the species. People there were unaccustomed to the presence of large 

predators, due to their extirpation in the early 19 th century and were irritated by the 

occurrence of bears in their vicinity, not just because of increased predation upon 

livestock, but also because of the fear for their lives. This was among key reasons, 

stressed in several protests of local people, who claimed urgent extraction of individual 

bears in the outer area of the range of brown bear. But it was not the case in the core 

range of the bear in south-central Slovenia, where increased densities of the species 

occurred. Traditionally accustomed to the occurrence of bears in the surrounding forests, 

economic aspects of the damage caused by the brown bear were key reasons for 

extraction claims of the inhabitants. 

Table 1: The structure of the damage caused by brown bears to human property in 

Notranjsko, the western part of the core management area in the period 1994 - 1998 

(source: BERCE 1999) 

Year Apiaries Livestock* Orchards Cereals Silo balls Yearly total 

1994 1 - 4 1 2 8 

1995 1 5 4 - 3 13 

1996 5 4 10 4 1 24 

1997 2 16 15 1 4 38 

1998 - 24 8 2 11 45 

TOTAL 9 49 41 8 21 128 

* mainly sheep, but also single cases of predation upon goats, cattle and horses 

Table 1 shows that the frequency of bear predation upon livestock in the period 1994 - 

1998 increased (r = 0.9413, n = 5, p < 0.05), along with bear damage upon human 

property in total (r = 0.9894, n = 5, p < 0.05). 

As regards protests of sheep-farmers, we can hardly imagine that any explanation of the 

conservation value of large predators might have a positive influence upon the attitude of 

the inhabitants in the area.


Similarly, problems of sheep predation by the brown bear increased in pre-alpine and 

alpine areas of Slovenia where, due to traditional forms of sheep-herding, the protection 

of flocks by efficient electric fences is nearly impossible (ADAMIČ / KOREN 1998). 

Along with the expansion of the population area of the brown bear as well as that of the 

wolf in last two years, human-bear conflicts moved out of the core area into other 

directions. More and more reports from year to year on the penetration of brown bears in 

north-western Slovenia (sightings, trackings and damage reports), and an increase in 

damage compensations paid show possible future trends of bear-sheep interactions. The 

Government of Slovenia widely supports sheep farming, but it has also put the brown 

bear under yearlong protection in the wider area of the Alps. Since the predation upon 

livestock would be the key obstacle for bear recovery, the competent governmental 

agencies are obliged to seek optimal ways of cohabitation among conservation 

management of the brown bear and sheep pasturing. It is clear that bear recovery is not 

just a pure ecological problem, but a socio-economic one, too. The efforts to introduce 

safer ways of pasturing on reduced pasture surfaces inside electric fences would seriously 

reduce the available food for sheep and consequently reduce the size of herds. Therefore 

electric fencing of the pastures would be the solution only for higher productive meadows 

in the valleys. Controlled pasturing by sheep-guards with dogs is thus the only solution 

for high alpine pastures. Extraction of problem bears which would repeatedly prey on 

sheep in pastures at higher altitudes should also be among the tools of conservation 

management of the brown bear in Slovenia in future, too. 

Traditional grazing of sheep and cattle in vast, unfenced alpine pastures above the 

timberline was the activity related to low grassland production at higher altitudes. In the 

mid-80s, sheep owners tried to keep sheep in fenced pastures in the valleys not far from 

the villages, too. But with increasing occurrence of bears in the area, even the sheep in 

fenced, small pastures were exposed to brown bear predation. Wire fences about 1.3-1.5 

m high were no real barrier to the bears, but they kept the sheep inside and made it 

impossible for them to escape. But, if these fences were improved with additional electric 

wires, they would represent good protection against predation. 

In 1994 and in 1995 one single bear killed more than 60 sheep in three different locations 

of alpine pastures in the vicinity of Kobarid, Drežnica and Bovec, in north-western 

Slovenia. Another 100 sheep were reported missing, due to attacks of the same animal. A 

state shooting licence for the extraction of the nuisance bear was issued in 1994, but the 

animal was extracted only in April 1996. 

An earthquake in spring 1998 seriously affected living conditions in alpine villages and 

also raised new problems of the expansion of the bear range towards species historical 

habitats in the Alps. Since tourism, on which the economy of the area was formerly based, 

was rendered impossible due to the damage done to housing and the infrastructure, 

livestock remained the only vital source of income to the majority of people in the 

villages. This new economic situation made the sheep -owners extremely sensitive to the 

occurrence of brown bears. The Ministry for Agriculture and Forestry supported their 

claims, issuing special shooting licences, by which two bears have been shot in this area 

and another three in the neighbourhood.


CONCLUSIONS 

The phenomenon of the range expansion of the brown bear and of the wolf since their full 

protection in 1993 is a real challenge to traditionally rigid attitudes of Europeans. 

Slovenia is no exception in its attitude towards large predators. Although this is a period 

of worldwide efforts to preserve rare animal species, rain forests and general biotic 

diversity, we are not yet aware that we are really capable of sharing our tiny European 

landscapes with large predators, as full members of these biotic communities. It is much 

easier for Europeans to support the survival of Indian tigers, and the survival of white 

sharks along the Coral reef than to imagine that the brown bear and the wolf would live in 

forests nearby. 

Although all three species were included in the Red list of threatened mammals in 

Slovenia in 1993, no state-wide strategy for the preservation of key habitats was yet 

adopted. In Central Europe large predators are actually forest dwellers, therefore their 

future fate is closely related to the degree of the preservation of forest habitats. But, if the 

proportion of private-owned forests in Slovenia, which is high even for current European 

standards, is taken into account, the idea of the preservation of habitats is in fact an 

utopia. Since the target conservation areas in Slovenia are limited to the state-owned 

forest reserves, natural parks and today’s wildlife reserves, any conservation interventions 

would thus have just a limited impact upon the welfare of large predators. Planned 

interspersion of patches of sheep pastures inside large blocks of sparsely settled forest 

landscapes in south-central Slovenia as well as the revitalisation of traditional ways of 

sheep herding in the Alps pose serious threats to the future welfare of all large predator 

species. Human-predator conflicts and rising farmers aversions against the protection of 

large predators in Slovenia as a consequence, will doubtless affect the conservation 

management strategy. 

According to a study of public attitudes towards large carnivores in different parts of 

Slovenia (KORENJAK 1995), and taking into account increasing protests of local 

communities and their petitions to extract problem bears and wolves in different parts of 

the large predators range, it is very important to strengthen our efforts to improve the 

research of human dimensions in the conservation of large carnivores. The key yet 

unresolved question is how to condition positive attitudes of local people in the Alps and 

Littoral Karst to the conservation of large predators, which were in fact exterminated by 

their grandfathers a good hundred years ago. Since the Ministry of Slovenia for 

Agriculture and Forestry is responsible for compensating the damages caused by large 

predators and other yearlong protected wildlife species, problems of economic losses due 

to the predation are not relevant at all. But the emotional pressures of sheep -owners, 

reinforced by the fear for their own lives, triggered by the corpses of surplus killed 

livestock are among important reasons for the predator-aversion in exposed areas. It has 

to be taken into account that many good conservation projects failed due to the exclusion 

of local people out of the conservation processes (BATH 1994, JACOBSON / MCNUGGAT 

1998) 

We are fully aware that Slovenia is too small to preserve its own viable populations of 

brown bears and wolves (ADAMIČ 1996, ADAMIČ et al 1998). New conservation 

strategies, based on the knowledge of conservation biology and landscape ecology 

(OPPDAM 1990, PULLIAM et al 1991, WIENS 1990, HANSSON / ANGELSTAM 1991,


FRANKLIN 1993) are to be built for future preservation of biodiversity and especially for 

conservation of viable populations of brown bears and other large predators in Slovenia. 

For that purpose, the existing and planned islands of national parks and reserves inside 

recent predator ranges should be declared as conservation centres, functionally tied to the 

surrounding landscapes, forming with them uniform, large enough joint conservation 

areas for brown bears. 

Because of evident transboundary connections between brown bears and wolves, roaming 

in south-central Slovenia and in Gorski Kotar in Croatia, future welfare of the species 

thus depends not only on their legal status in Slovenia, but also on that in Croatia. 

Establishment of interstate cooperation among Slovenia and Croatia for joint conservation 

of natural resources in border areas and the creation of Dinaric Large Predator Megareserve, 

with extensive conservation management strategy for all large predator species 

would be the best solution. The challenge and significance of cross boundary 

management plans of expanding wolf populations have been stressed by several authors, 

as most reasonable and efficient conservation solution for the welfare of the species 

(MECH 1995, NOSS et al 1996). 

In the course of planned interstate cooperation, a joint large predator conservation area, 

comprising about 5500 km 2 of habitats on Slovene side and about 2000 km 2 of habitats in 

Gorski Kotar and in Čičarija in Croatia (HUBER / FRKOVIĆ 1994), might be established. 

The interstate project might bring together about 7000 km 2 of “Slovenian-Croatian 

Interstate Large predator Conservation Area”. If the project is realised, there will be 

enough space for the conservation of viable populations of about 500 bears (projected 

acceptance density of average 0.7 bears / 10 km 2 ). Limitations on the intensity of spatial 

activities, affecting the suitability of habitats, will have to be implemented in the whole 

area. At this very point, the financial as well as the political support of the European 

Community will be of crucial importance. The projected population size will fulfil the 

criteria of long term viability. Thus its positive side effects of regional and international 

importance will also be warranted. 

The knowledge gathered in Slovenia will be of national importance and will be used as 

background information for modern conservation strategy of problematic wildlife, but 

would also be important for other alpine countries, which support the idea of bear 

recovery in the Alps. Its application will help in the decision making processes in the 

protection of isolated populations, and also in the evaluation of planned actions on the 

recovery of former alpine bear populations.


REFERENCES 

ADAMIČ, M. (1986) The land use changes in Slovenia and their influence on range and densities of 

some (game) wildlife species. Proceedings of 18 th World IUFRO Congress, Div 1/2: pp. 588- 

600. Ljubljana 1986. 

ADAMIČ, M. / KOREN, I. (1998) Možnosti povratka velikih zveri v Alpe. pp. 53-64 v J.Diaci(ured.) 

“Gorski gozd”. 19.gozdarski študijski dnevi. Oddelek za gozdarstvo in obnovljive gozdne vire 

BI. Ljubljana 

BATH, A.J. (1993) Public attitudes towards polar bears. An application of human dimensions in 

wildlife resource research. pp. 168-174 v I.D. Thompson, ur.: Forests and wildlife towards the 

21 th Century. Proceedings of the 21 th Congress International Union of Game Biologists, Vol.1. 

Halifax. Nova Scotia, Canada. 

BERCE, M. (1999) The report on the claims for the compensation of the damages upon human 

property, caused by the brown bear and other large predators in Notranjsko Wildlife 

Management Area in the period 1994 - 1998. Postojna 1999, 4 pp. (unpublished report) 

FRANKLIN, J.F. (1993) Preserving biodiversity: species, ecosystems or landscapes. Ecological 

Applications 3: pp. 202-205. 

HANSSON, L. / ANGELSTAM, P. (1991) Landscape ecology as a theoretical basis for nature 

conservation. Landscape Ecology 5: pp. 191-201. 

HUBER, Ð. / FRKOVIĆ, A. (1994) Brown bear management in Croatia. Proceedings of the 21th 

International Congress IUGB. "Forests and wildlife towards the 21 th Century", Part 1: pp. 287- 

292. Halifax, Canada (I.D.Thompson, editor). 

JACOBSON, S.K. / MCDUFF, M.D. (1998) Training idiot savants: the lack of human dimensions in 

conservation biology. Conservation Biology 12(2): pp. 263-267. 

KORENJAK, A. (1995) Človek in velike zveri v Avstriji in Sloveniji. Javnomnenjska raziskava o 

medvedu, volku in risu kot ocena možnosti varstva problematičnih živalskih vrst. Diplomska 

naloga: 74 pp. Univerza v Ljubljani. Oddelek za gozdarstvo Biotehniške fakultete. Ljubljana 

1995 

MECH, L.D. (1995) The challenge and opportunity of recovering wolf populations. Conservation 

Biology 9(2): pp. 270- 278. 

NOSS, R.F. / QUIGLEY, H.B. / HORNOCKER, M.G. / MERRILL, T. / PAQUET, P.C. (1996) Conservation 

biology and carnivore conservation in Rocky Mountains. Conservation Biology 10 (4): pp. 949- 

963. 

OPPDAM, P. (1990) Understanding the ecology of populations in fragmented landscapes. 

Transactions of 19 th Congress IUGB, Trondheim 1989, Vol.2: pp. 373-380. NINA Trondheim 

1990. 

PULLIAM, H.R. / DANIELSON, B.J. (1991) Sources, sinks and habitat selection: a landscape 

perspective on population dynamics. American Naturalist 137, Supplement: pp. (50-66).


STAND DYNAMICS OF THE VIRGIN FOREST RAJHENAVSKI 

ROG (SLOVENIA) DURING THE PAST CENTURY 

ABSTRACT 

by Andrej BONČINA* 

The paper concerns developmental features of the virgin forest Rajhenavski Rog forest 

stands during the past hundred years. The study is based on the first data on forests from 

1893, full callipering of forest stands in the period 1957-1995, stand inventories carried 

out in selected permanent sample plots, and maps of horizontal structure of the virgin 

forest made in 1985 and in 1995. The contention about the alternation of dominant tree 

species, silver fir and European beech, was confirmed. The proportion of silver fir in the 

growing stock was the lowest in 1893 (27%) and the highest in 1967 (61%). It fell to 57% 

by 1995, and all indices suggest a further decrease in the future. During the period 

analysed, d.b.h. structure of forest stands changed as well. This shows that the virgin 

forest is not a static system, although the growing stock remained practically unaltered 

during this period (800m 3 /ha). An analysis of changes in the horizontal structure of virgin 

forest stands over a decade shows that the proportion of the optimal stage was decreasing 

while the proportion of the terminal and juvenile stage was increasing. Developmental 

dynamics of individual stands depends on tree species composition. 


Virgin forest relicts are of many-sided significance. They are perfect for studying the 

natural structure of a forest and its processes. The main questions related to such a study 

are: How does a virgin forest function? How it is preserved although it is subject to 

changes? Which are the important organisational principles? Permanent sample plots and 

stand inventories conducted over a longer period of time give us an insight into 

developmental processes. Virgin forest relicts are systems which are relatively more 

closed and less disturbed than managed forests. Nonetheless, they too are affected by 

atmospheric pollution, populations of big herbivores, tourism and other factors. Areas 

they occupy are definitely not large enough for a ‘pre-biocoenosis’ of animal and plant 

species to be established, therefore they are better referred to as virgin forest relicts. 

* Doc. Dr. A.B., Department of Forestry and Renewable Forest Resources, Biotechnical Faculty, University of 


96 Stand Dynamics of the Virgin Forest Rajhenavski Rog (Slovenia) ... 

In Slovenia there are approximately 200 forest reserves, including some virgin forest 

reserves, most of which are situated in the Kočevje region: Krokar, Virgin forest 

Rajhenavski Rog, Prelesnik’s sinkhole, Strmec. The best known among them is the Virgin 

forest Rajhenavski Rog, in which most stand inventories and studies were carried out. In 

the first forest management plans for these forests (HUFNAGEL 1893), the virgin forest 

Rajhenavski Rog was neither protected nor referred to as a virgin forest. As a virgin forest 

it was first mentioned in 1904 (HUFNAGEL 1904) and the first stand inventory of the 

virgin forest with present borders (51.14 ha) was made in 1957 (DERBIŠ 1957). Later a 

number of inventories and studies were conducted. Full callipering was made in 1967, 

1976, 1985 and 1995, phytocoenologic and pedological mapping and phytocoenologic 

studies were carried out (PUNCER 1980, PUNCER et al. 1974, MARINČEK et al. 1980), and 

studies on regeneration (VESELIČ 1980, BONČINA 1997), ornithofauna (PERUŠEK 1992), 

distribution of trees (CEDILNIK and KOTAR 1992, KOTAR 1993a, 1993b, BONČINA 1997), 

fungi (HOČEVAR et al. 1995), forest stand structure (HARTMAN 1984, 1987; MLINŠEK et al. 

1980, BONČINA 1997) and biodiversity were made (BONČINA 1997). 

In 1985 three permanent research plots with the total area of 1.91 hectares were set up by 

Mlinšek, and the first stand inventory was carried out. In the same year the patch pattern 

of the virgin forest was analysed and a map of developmental phases was made. Two 

years later a monograph on the virgin forest Rajhenavski Rog was published (HARTMAN 

1987) within the framework of studies on forest reserves. In 1995 full callipering of the 

virgin forest was conducted and stands of the three permanent sample plots were again 

analysed, along with the horizontal structure of the whole virgin forest, and a map of 

developmental phases was made. Stand structure of different developmental stages was 

analysed in randomly selected plots, and diversity of plant species and regeneration of 

woody species were investigated. 

AIM 

The aim of this study was to determine developmental features of virgin forest stands. The 

approach was based on full callipering of the whole virgin forest carried out in the period 

1957-1995, on data from 1893, on analyses of stands in permanent sample plots 

conducted in 1985 and 1995, and on analyses of horizontal structure of the virgin forest 

carried out in 1985 and 1995. 

METHODS 

Full callipering was carried out in 1957, 1967, 1976, 1985, and 1995. Trees were 

registered according to d.b.h. classes, the measurement threshold being 10 cm, in some 

years even 5 cm. Snags were also measured. Distinction was made between dead standing 

trees and dead lying trees. To calculate the growing stock, Čokl’s tariff table was used, 

namely number 8 for conifers and number 9 for broadleaved trees (ČOKL 1992). 

In permanent sample plots, all trees were measured and assessed according to the 

following: tree species, spatial co-ordinates of trees, diameter (mm), height (0.5 m), social 

status, vitality, developmental trend, size, crown coverage and shelter, etc. Methods used 

have been described in detail by HARTMAN (1987) and BONČINA (1997).


The patch pattern of the whole virgin forest (51.14 ha) was analysed in 1985 and 1995. 

Criteria for the mapping of developmental phases were similar but not quite identical, 

therefore changes in the patch pattern of virgin forest stands were analysed only in 

general. The following developmental phases were distinguished in the first analysis 

(HARTMAN 1987): optimal phase, optimal phase with regeneration, juvenile phase under 

shelter (stand re-initiation phase), juvenile phase without shelter (stand initiation phase), 

selection phase, initial terminal phase, and late terminal phase. In the second mapping 

(BONČINA 1995), we took account of research methods suggested by KORPEL (1995) and 

thus for each stand developmental phase and developmental stage (juvenile, optimal and 

terminal stage) were given. In comparison with results of the first mapping of horizontal 

structure, developmental phases used here are more useful. According to d.b.h. class, 

height structure of stands, crown shelter, and distribution of trees, we distinguished the 

following: stand initiation phase (juvenile phase), pole stand, young and late optimal 

phase, stand re-initiation phase, two-layered stand, selection phase, and gap. 

RESULTS 

A comparison of stand parameters 

Tree species composition 

Silver fir (Abies alba) and European beech (Fagus sylvatica) are the dominant tree 

species in the virgin forest Rajhenavski Rog. The proportion of these two species in the 

total growing stock is 99.5%. The remaining tree species are modestly represented. In the 

total area of the forest reserve encompassing 51.14 hectares we registered 20 Norway 

spruce trees, 89 mountain maple trees, 12 mountain elm trees and 14 lime trees. These 

tree species are natural elements of a Dinaric silver fir-European beech forest, but they 

are, in general, less competitive under conditions of a distinctly endogenous environment. 

The niche of these species is slightly larger gaps, which can occur on account of die-back 

of a group of trees from the upper position or due to the impact of abiotic factors. 

Disturbances that would lead to the formation of such gaps occur only rarely. Hence the 

proportion of tree species mentioned above is relatively low. 

Over the past forty years the proportion of silver fir in the total growing stock of virgin 

forest stands has substantially decreased. A comparison of results of stand inventory made 

in 1957 and in 1967 shows a slight increase in its proportion in the total growing stock. 

Since 1967 the proportion of silver fir has steadily decreased. In 1967, during full 

callipering of the virgin forest, 176 silver fir trees with the growing stock of 513 m 3 were 

recorded in the area of one hectare, while in the last stand inventory only 118 silver fir 

trees with the growing stock of 458 m 3 were recorded. Over a period of thirty years, then, 

the proportion of silver fir in the total growing stock fell from 64% to 57%, and in the 

total number of trees from 59% to 47%. 

The analysis of stand development over a relatively short period of time substantiates 

changes in tree species composition of virgin forest stands. The first data on stands under 

consideration were found in the forest management plan for the area of Rog from 1893. 

According to this plan, the present virgin forest was part of a larger forest compartment,


in which silver fir accounted for a mere 27.5%. Thus the present proportion of silver fir is 

much higher than that some hundred years ago. 

The comparison must be considered with certain reservations: 

– the area of the forest compartment was 89.35 hectares, thus almost twice as large 

as the current area of the virgin forest; 

– stand parameters were determined with the use of sample methods; 

– growing stock values determined are relatively low, since trees with d.b.h. of over 

80 cm were not taken into account. The growing stock of the compartment, which 

included the present virgin forest, was 467 m 3 /ha. 

– anthropogenic influences on the virgin forest have not been substantiated, but they 

are possible due to the relative vicinity of the sawmill Rog. In the fringe area of the 

virgin forest a dead lying silver fir tree was found, probably some decades old, 

which must have been cut with a saw, judging from the shape of the front surface. 

Although tree species composition, which was established a hundred years ago, is only a 

rough approximation, the results verify the assumption that tree species composition of 

the virgin forest has substantially changed over the past hundred years. A more detailed 

d.b.h. structure of conifers and broadleaved trees supports the contention about the 

alternation of tree species. 

Figure 1: The ratio between broadleaved trees and conifers in the total number of trees 

of the virgin forest Rajhenavski Rog in the period 1957-1995 

N / ha 

350 

300 

250 

200 

150 

100 

50 

0 

Broadleaved trees 

Conifers 

1957 1967 1976 1985 1995 

Year


Growing stock 

The growing stock of virgin forest stands has remained practically unchanged over the 

past forty years. Between the first full callipering in 1957 and the last, the change was 

insignificant. Therefore we could assume that virgin forest stands are in the state of 

equilibrium, which means that the increment of trees equals the quantity of dead trees. 

Growing stock, however, is not the most appropriate stand parameter for the description 

of developmental processes in virgin forest stands. Although tree species composition of 

virgin forest stands, d.b.h. structure and the proportion of individual developmental 

phases of the virgin forest changed considerably during the analysed period, the growing 

stock remained relatively constant in the total area, though it changed substantially in a 

smaller area. 

Table 1: The growing stock of the virgin forest Rajhenavski Rog in the period 1957 - 

1995 

Year 1957 1967 1976 1985 1995 

Growing stock (m 3 /ha) 783 803 802 799 798 

D.b.h. structure 

D.b.h. structure is a stand parameter which clearly shows, along with tree species 

composition, developmental features of virgin forest stands. During the period 1957- 

1995, d.b.h. structure of stands changed substantially in the 51-hectare area of the virgin 

forest. Changes that relate to the life cycle of trees and stands are congruent with changes 

determined in the horizontal structure of virgin forest stands. The structure and 

functioning of virgin forest stands are also influenced by exterior factors. Silver fir 

decline, then, is attributed to pollution, while the efficiency of spontaneous regeneration 

of stands is adversely affected by big ungulate herbivores. 

The most characteristic changes in d.b.h. structure of stands during the period 1957-1995 

are as follows: lower density of trees, lower number of medium-size diameter trees, a 

slightly higher number of large diameter trees. Recently, however, the number of young, 

small diameter trees has risen, exclusively European beech trees. 

These changes indicate that virgin forest stands are not in the state of equilibrium, at least 

not in such a small area as is the analysed virgin forest. Differences established for d.b.h. 

structure of stands suggest ageing of stands, as the study by HARTMAN (1987) has already 

shown, and also decaying of stands, which will be even more distinct in the future.


Figure 2: D.b.h. structure of stands in the virgin forest Rajhenavski Rog in 1957 and 

1995 

N / ha 

40 

35 

30 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

0 

3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 

D.b.h. classes (5 cm) 

1957 

1995 

The analysis of d.b.h. structure of silver fir and European beech complements the insight 

into developmental processes of virgin forest stands. Considerable changes were found in 

silver fir population. Over the period of forty years the number of small diameter trees fell 

nearly by half. The number of medium-size diameter trees was also substantially reduced. 

In an area of one hectare only two silver fir trees of the second d.b.h. class were found. 

Such considerable changes in d.b.h. structure of silver fir (Figure 3, Table 2) cannot be 

attributed either to influences of abiotic factors or to endogenous processes, such as dieback 

of trees due to competition, or to the impact of biotic factors and the like. This 

change in d.b.h. structure could be at least partly the result of a phenomenon which is 

referred to as silver fir decline. The reasons for the occurrence of this phenomenon have 

not yet been satisfactorily explained. 

A study on regeneration (BONČINA 1997) shows that silver fir does regenerate but it does 

not grow higher than 0.5 m, due to the influence of herbivores. The vitality of silver fir 

trees analysed in permanent sample plots (Appendix A, Table 6) is considerably lower 

than that of European beech. Thus we believe that silver fir decline will continue in the 

future. A high proportion of large diameter silver fir trees (Appendix B, Table 7) in the 

total growing stock seems to be sustained, but in the future it will decrease for reasons 

mentioned above. 

In the following decades in the next century, tree species composition will be very much 

in favour of European beech stands. The proportion of silver fir will definitely fall. Where 

it will stabilise, it is uncertain. This depends largely on survival of medium-size diameter 

silver fir trees and regeneration and ingrowth of young silver fir trees. 

To understand the alternation of the two main tree species and changes in d.b.h. structure, 

it is vital to gain an insight into the past development. A hundred years ago, d.b.h. 

structure of the compartment, which included the current virgin forest, was quite 

different. There were relatively few large diameter silver fir trees, but there were three


times as many small diameter trees (15-30 cm) as today and about twice as many 

deciduous trees (European beech) of the same diameter during the same period. Figure 3 

and Table 2 show the ageing process of silver fir population in virgin forest stands. The 

main question is whether the resumption of silver fir ingrowth in silver fir-European 

beech forests can be expected. 

Figure 3: D.b.h. structure of silver fir and European beech population in 1957 and in 

1995 

European beech 

N / ha 

N / ha 

80 

60 

40 

20 

1957 1995 

0 

10-30 30-50 50-80 80 and 

over 

80 

60 

40 

20 

D.b.h. classes 

Silver fir 

1957 1995 

0 

10-30 30-50 50-80 80 and 

over 

D.b.h. classes


Table 2: D.b.h. structure of stands expressed in number of trees per hectare according to 

d.b.h. classes in 1893, 1957 and in 1995 

Conifers Broadleaved trees 

D.b.h. classes (cm) 1893 1957 1995 1893 1957 1995 

15-30 89 53 29 49 33 35 

30-50 58 44 23 61 36 28 

50-80 13 55 42 56 32 36 

80 and over * 10 15 * 3 5 

* Data not available 

A rise in the proportion of small diameter trees is the most noticeable change in d.b.h. 

structure of European beech population during the period 1957-1995. Also, the analysis 

of trees with a diameter below the measurement threshold shows that European beech has 

been spreading rapidly. European beech also efficiently regenerates and, in comparison to 

other tree species, its height growth is the most efficient and undisturbed of all (BONČINA 

1997). Consequently, we believe that the number of young European beech trees will 

further increase in the next decades. Arguments for the alternation of tree species are 

supported by data on d.b.h. structure of European beech from a hundred years ago 

(HUFNAGEL 1893). At that time European beech was the dominant species of the virgin 

forest. Silver fir was in a subordinate position, prevailing in the lower position, but there 

were about twice as many large diameter European beech trees as today. 

Horizontal structure of the virgin forest 

Variability of stands may be mainly attributed to different distribution of subjects of 

different tree species, different height, different crown form and the like. Due to growth 

and die-back of trees, there are constant changes in stand structure. An element of 

horizontal structure or of the patch pattern of a forest (HILGARTER 1971; KORPEL 1993, 

1995) can be referred to as a patch (BONČINA 1997). This element differs from its 

surrounding area according to selected criteria. Homogeneity within a patch is much 

higher than that between patches. 

A patch can be a stand or part of a stand (grove, group). In such analyses of horizontal 

structure, two main issues are addressed, namely, determination of stands (patches) and 

classification of types, phases, stages, etc. (BONČINA 1997, 1998). It is characteristic of 

virgin forest stand structure that boundaries between individual stands are not clear-cut, 

only rarely are they distinct. In addition, variability of stands (patches) of the same kind is 

relatively high. 

Conditions in which virgin forests under consideration grow are not distinguished by 

natural disasters, which would trigger off cyclic development of stands or even secondary 

succession in a large area, where stands would contain trees of a single generation. In 

general, die-back of an individual tree or of a group of trees sets off cyclic development in


a very small area. This is the reason why cyclic development is less distinct and less 

obvious in a virgin forest than in a managed forest (OTTO 1994; BONČINA 1997). 

The main criterion for determining an individual patch (stands) is developmental phase. 

Therefore we used developmental phases to denote a stand type. In studies on virgin 

forests different methods are suggested for a patch pattern analysis. A virgin forest is 

classified into stand types, life phases, developmental phases or developmental stages. 

Different concepts are used but the aim is similar, if not the same, that is, to describe at 

one’s best, under given natural conditions, diversity of forest stands and, above all, to 

show their development. The mapping of developmental phases of a virgin forest is easier 

if stands of optimal stage prevail, whereas stages of decay and juvenile stages are more 

demanding, since stand structure changes more rapidly. Spatial structure of a forest does 

not depend only on forest stand structure, but also on spatial scale employed for the 

analysis of a virgin forest and criteria used, which in turn depend on the intent of a study. 

Thus, maps of developmental phases are only an approximate description of different 

stands and mainly an aid for understanding the structure of stands and their 

developmental dynamics. 

An analysis of the patch pattern of a virgin forest is based on methodology developed by 

LEIBUNDGUT (1959, 1982), MLINŠEK (1980), and KORPEL (1993, 1995). We divided the 

developmental cycle of a virgin forest stand into three stages - juvenile, optimal and 

decaying. Stands (or patches) at different developmental phases were classified in 

individual stages. The optimal stage is distinguished by a high growing stock, high crown 

density, and, in most cases, a uniform stand structure. The decaying stage is characterised 

by intensive die-back of trees in the upper layer, hence crown closure is full of gaps. The 

growing stock of such stands is decreasing, the quantity of dead trees is high, and stand 

structure is often uneven or it consists of different layers. The juvenile stage is 

distinguished by an increase in volume increment of a new generation of trees, whose 

ingrowth is intensive, and by a decrease in the number of trees of previous generations. 

Stands of juvenile and decaying stages are often interlinked. If the growing stock of the 

new generation trees is higher than that of the previous generation, the stand is classed as 

juvenile stage. Different stages were assessed in the field but they could have been 

determined objectively only with measurements and a study of the development of stands 

during a certain period. 

Table 3: A list and the proportion of developmental stages and developmental phases in 

the virgin forest Rajhenavski Rog in 1995 (BONČINA 1997) 

Developmental stage Developmental phases 

Juvenile stage (12%): Stand initiation phase, two-layered stands, selection phase 

Optimal stage(52%): Optimal phase, late optimal phase 

Terminal stage (36%): 

Stand re-initiation phase, selection phase, two-layered stands, 

gaps 

In the first mapping of horizontal structure of virgin forest stands, stands were classified 

according to developmental phases (MLINŠEK et al. 1980, HARTMAN 1987). Results of


this mapping show that optimal phase accounts for 52% of the total area, optimal phase 

with regeneration 17%, selection phase 3%, terminal phase 3%, juvenile phase without 

shelter 9%, and juvenile phase under shelter 16% of the total area (HARTMAN 1987). As 

early as then efforts were made to find the most appropriate “developmental phases” for 

the description of different kinds of stand structure. The maps of developmental phases 

are congruent with one another as to content, although they were made quite 

independently. 

Table 4: A comparison of horizontal structure of the virgin forest Rajhenavski Rog in 

1985 and 1995 

Year 1985 (HARTMAN 1987) Year 1995 (BONČINA 1997) 

Developmental phases 

% of total 

area 

Developmental phases 

% of total 

area 

Stand initiation phase 9 Stand initiation phase 2 

Optimal phase and optimal 

phase with regeneration 

69 Young and late optimal phase 52 

Stand re-initiation phase 16 Stand re-initiation phase 19 

Selection phase 3 Selection and two layered stands 26 

Terminal phase 3 - 

- Gaps 1 

Despite justified objections to the mapping of virgin forest stands (BONČINA 1997; 1998; 

BONČINA / DIACI 1998), it is evident that (1) the structure of individual stands in the 

virgin forest Rajhenavski Rog differs, that (2) horizontal structure differs from that in 

other analysed virgin forests in Slovenia, for instance Krokar, and that (3) horizontal 

structure of the virgin forest Rajhenavski Rog changed over a period of ten years. For the 

proportion of the optimal stage was reduced by about 17%, while the proportion of 

selection phase and two-layered stands, which were classed as the juvenile or decaying 

stage, increased by as much. Changes in horizontal structure of the virgin forest 

established for over a relatively short period of ten years, are in keeping with changes in 

d.b.h. structure of a virgin forest and with an analysis of dead trees (BONČINA 1997). 

When patches of horizontal structure of the virgin forest were mapped, tree species 

composition was given for each patch and it was established that developmental stages 

correlate with tree species composition. In optimal stages European beech is dominant, 

especially in the young optimal phase in the south part of the virgin forest, where stands 

are not expected to decay soon. In stands of the terminal and juvenile stage and in some 

stands of the late optimal phase, silver fir dominates in the growing stock. Consequently, 

it is expected that these stands will continue to decay and that the area of the optimal stage 

will further decrease in the coming decades. 

Cyclic development of virgin forest stands varies. There is not only one type of 

development. Yet some types are more common than others and thus slightly more 

probable that others. Silver fir decline is the reason for considerable changes in stand


structure and in intensive developmental dynamics of the virgin forest. Stand dynamics 

depends on the proportion of silver fir in the growing stock of a stand, its distribution and 

intensity of die-back. The following examples are illustrative (BONČINA 1997): 

– if a silver fir tree dies in a stand of the young optimal phase, then remaining trees, 

European beech in particular, fill in the vacant space with crown growth. There are 

fewer trees but they have larger crowns. 

– if the proportion of silver fir is high and it dies uniformly in the area, two-layered 

stands are formed, and European beech occupies the lower position; 

– if silver fir trees die one after another or in small clusters unevenly in an area, 

stand structure is selection, 

– if the proportion of silver fir is high and trees die intensively, then regenerating 

stands and young uniform European beech stands are formed. 

Individual stand structure is dependent on a given tree species composition. Thus the top 

layer of two-layered stands consists almost exclusively of silver fir and the lower layer of 

European beech. Similarly, selection stand structure depends on the appropriate share of 

silver fir or its die-back. The proportion of European beech in the growing stock will 

increase more and more, and therefore stand structure will change as well. 

CONCLUSIONS 

Findings of studies on virgin forest stands contribute to our understanding of the structure 

and developmental processes of forest ecosystems. At the same time they give us 

information which is useful for close-to-nature forest management. The following should 

be underlined in particular: 

1. The structure of virgin forest stands is not constant, unchanging or in the state of 

balance. We speak about certain intervals, within which stand structure changes. 

2. A comparison of d.b.h. structure shows that stands in the virgin forest Rajhenavski 

Rog are ageing, since the proportion of large diameter trees has increased, the density 

of trees has decreased and, above all, the number of medium-size diameter trees has 

fallen. Recently, stands have been regenerating intensively, which results in a higher 

number of trees of the second d.b.h. class, (5 - 10 cm). 

3. The development of the dominant tree species, silver fir and European beech, is not 

parallel, quite the opposite. About a hundred years ago the proportion of silver fir in 

the total growing stock accounted for a mere 27%. The available data suggest the 

commencement of intensive regeneration of silver fir during that time and a bit earlier 

and its gradual ingrowth in the stand canopy, in which European beech dominated. 

The proportion of silver fir in the total growing stock was rising till 1967 when it 

gradually started to decrease. All indices suggest that the proportion of silver fir will 

decrease further in the next decades. The current state, which is just the opposite of 

that a hundred years ago, is distinguished by intensive ingrowth of European beech in 

the stand canopy, where silver fir still dominates in the growing stock.


4. Despite considerable developmental changes, which are also reflected in the altered 

d.b.h. structure and tree species composition, the growing stock remains practically 

unchanged. The average quantity of stemwood is approximately 800 m 3 /ha. 

5. Results of the study support the assumption about the alternation of the two main tree 

species, silver fir and European beech. This is undoubtedly a natural process, which 

may have been affected by anthropogenic factors such as anthropogenically induced 

changes in wildlife population, pollution and other global factors. Forest ecosystems 

respond to all impacts at the same time. Therefore, we cannot really appraise the 

extent to which the alternation of tree species is a natural or an anthropogenic process. 

We must be aware that a natural forest ecosystem is not a static system, which could 

be determined on the basis of certain tree species composition, structure and the like, 

but it is a dynamic and complex system. Different species, including dominant species, 

may use resources equivalently in stable natural conditions (WHITTAKER 1985). This 

observation is important for our understanding of natural structure and composition of 

forest stands (ecosystems). It is perfectly natural that tree species composition changes 

and that stands with different tree species composition and structure can grow under 

similar site conditions. Certain types of composition and structure of stands are thus 

just more probable than others, but the latter are not less natural. 

6. The results of the study and their interpretation are affected by the given spatial 

framework, within which the study was conducted. Therefore, any excessive 

generalisation would be amiss. Any spatial scale represents a new quality, which 

interferes with our understanding of forest ecosystems. We found that the total 

growing stock of stands remained unchanged in the total area of the virgin forest. If 

the area of the virgin forest was smaller, we would certainly have found considerable 

changes in the growing stock of stands during the period analysed. Horizontal and 

d.b.h. structure of forest stands, however, is a different matter, since both of them 

changed substantially during the period under consideration. The area of the virgin 

forest (51 hectares) is obviously not large enough for such a balance to be established. 

And again we can assume that our conclusions about d.b.h. and horizontal structure of 

forest stands would have been different if the area of the virgin forest analysed had 

been larger. Changes in tree species composition, however, could be regarded as a 

phenomenon that can be observed in the whole area of Slovenia’s Dinaric silver fir- 

European beech forests as well as in the analysed virgin forest. 


The research and publication of this paper was made possible by the Ministry of Science 

and Technology of the Republic of Slovenia within the framework of projects J4-0513- 

0488-98 and L4-0855-0488-98. 

REFERENCES 

BONČINA, A. (1997) Naravne strukture gozda in njihove funkcije pri sonaravnem gospodarjenju z 

gozdom (Natural forest structures and their functions in close-to-nature forest management), 

Doktorska disertacija, BF, Oddelek za gozdarstvo, Ljubljana, 210 pp.


BONČINA, A. (1998) Research of structure and biodiversity in managed and virgin fir-beech forest in 

Dinaric region of Slovenia. Deutscher Verband forstlicher Forschungsanstalten, Sektion 

forstliche Biometrie und Informatik, 11. Tagung, Freiburg (in print). 

BONČINA, A. / DIACI, J. (1998). Contemporary research on regeneration pattern of Central European 

virgin forests with recommendation for the future research. Zbornik gozdarstva in lesarstva, 56, 

Ljubljana, pp. 33-53. 

CEDILNIK, A. / KOTAR, M. (1992) Razmestitev dreves v sestoju. Zbornik gozdarstva in lesarstva, 40, 

Ljubljana, pp.15-40. 

ČOKL, M. edt. (1992) Gozdarski priročnik. Tablice, 6. izdaja. Biotehniška fakulteta, Oddelek za 

gozdarstvo. 

DERBIŠ, M. (1957) Pragozd v Kočevskem Rogu. Diplomsko delo. Biotehniška fakulteta, Oddelek za 

gozdarstvo, Ljubljana, 46 pp. 

GAŠPERŠIČ, F. (1974) Zakonitosti naravnega pomlajevanja jelovo-bukovih gozdov na visokem krasu 

snežniško-javorniškega masiva. Strokovna in znanstvena dela, BTF, Inštitut za gozdno in lesno 

gospodarstvo, Ljubljana, 133 pp. 

HARTMAN, T. (1984) Razvojna dogajanja v pragozdu Rajhenavski Rog. GozdV 42, 6, pp. 253-258. 

HARTMAN, T. (1987) Pragozd Rajhenavski Rog. Strokovna in znanstvena dela, 89. BTF, Oddelek za 


HILLGARTER, F.W. (1971) Waldbauliche und ertragskundliche Untersuchungen im subalpinen 

Fichtenurwald Scatle/Briegels. Zürich, 80 pp. 

HOČEVAR, S. / BATIČ, F. / PISKERNIK, M. / MARTINČIČ, A. (1995) Glive v pragozdovih Slovenije. 3. 

Dinarski gorski pragozdovi na Kočevskem in v Trnovskem gozdu. Strokovna in znanstvena 

dela, 117, Gozdarski inštitut Slovenije, 320 pp. 

HUFNAGEL, L. (1893) Wirtschaftsplan der Betriebsklasse III. Hornwald. 


KORPEL, Š. (1993) Vorkommen, Charakteristik und Folge der Enwicklungsstadien, -phasen in der 

europäischen Urwäldern. Symposium über die Urwälder, (Saniga, M. & Korpel, Š. edts.) 

Forstliche Fakultät der technischen Universität Zvolen, pp. 3-10. 

KORPEL, Š. (1995) Die Urwälder der Westkarpaten. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Stuttgart, 310 pp. 

KOTAR, M. (1993a) Določanje načina razmestitve dreves v optimalni razvojni fazi gozda. Zbornik 

gozdarstva in lesarstva, 42, Ljubljana, pp. 121-153. 

KOTAR, M. (1993b) Verteilungsmuster der Bäume in einer Optimalphase im Urwald. Symposium 

über die Urwälder, (Saniga, M. & Korpel, Š. edts.) Forstliche Fakultät der technischen 

Universität Zvolen, pp. 27-44. 

LEIBUNDGUT, H. (1982) Europäische Urwälder der Bergstufe. Verlag Paul Haupt, Bern und 

Stuttgart, 306 pp. 

LEIBUNDGUT, H. (1959) Über Zweck und Methodik der Struktur- und Zuwachsanalyse von 

Urwäldern. Schweiz. Zeitschr. f. Forstwesen, 110 Jg., Nr.3, pp. 111-124. 

MARINČEK, L. / PUNCER, I. / ZUPANČIČ M. (1980) Die floristischen und strukturellen Unterschiede 

zwischen dem Urwald und dem Wirtscahftswald der Gesellschaft Abieti-Fagetum dinaricum.


Bericht über das internationale Symposion der Internationalen Vereinigung für 

Vegetationskunde in Rinteln, Vaduz, pp. 249-263. 

MLINŠEK, D. et al. (1980) Gozdni rezervati v Sloveniji. Inštitut za gozdno in lesno gospodarstvo 

Biotehniške fakultetev Ljubljani, 414 pp. 

MLINŠEK, D. (1989) Pra-gozd v naši krajini. Ljubljana, 157 pp. 

OTTO, H.J. (1994) Waldökologie, pp. 391. Verlag Ulmer, Stuttgart. 

PERUŠEK, M. (1992) Ptice pragozdnih ostankov Rajhenavski Rog in Pečka ter njihova odvisnost od 

stanja sestojev. Gozdarski vestnik 7-8, Ljubljana, pp. 322-330. 

PUNCER, I. (1980) Dinarski jelovo-bukovi gozdovi na Kočevskem. SAZU. Razprave, 22, 6, 161 pp. 

PUNCER, I. / WOJTERSKI, T. / ZUPANČIČ, M. (1974) Der Urwald Kočevski Rog in Slowenien. 

Fragmenta floristica et geobotanica, 20, 1, pp. 41-87. 

VESELIČ, Ž. (1980) Analiza poškodovanosti gozdnega mladja po divjadi v pragozdnem rezervatu 

Rajhenavski Rog na Kočevskem. Postojna, tipkopis. 

WHITTAKER, R.H. (1975) Communities and ecosystems. Macmillan Publishing Co.,Inc., New York, 

385 pp.


Appendix A 

Table 5: Stem wood (V-m 3 /ha) and the number (N-n/ha) of dead standing and dead lying 

trees at different developmental phases of the virgin forest (BONČINA 1997) 

Developmental phases V N Proportion 

of silver fir 

(%V) 

Life trees Dead trees 

V N Proportion 

of silver fir 

(%V) 

Young optimal phase 1066 378 0.15 113 130 0.62 

Late optimal phase 917 266 0.54 323 142 0.76 

Stand re-initiation phase 942 241 0.52 474 134 0.77 

Selection phase 720 259 0.53 165 89 0.40 

Two-layered stand 977 289 0.99 316 104 0.58 

Table 6: Vitality of trees in research plots expressed in the proportion of the growing 

stock (%) according to vitality classes (size sample is 1083 trees with the total growing 

stock of 2700 m 3 (BONČINA 1997) 

VITALITY 

European 

beech 

Silver fir Total 

Very vital 1 2 2 

Vital 57 35 45 

Poorly vital 25 53 40 

Non vital 13 10 11 

Hardly alive 4 1 2


Appendix B 

Table 7: D.b.h. structure of conifers and broadleaved trees in stands of the virgin forest 

Rajhenavski Rog in the years 1957, 1967, 1976, 1985 (HARTMAN 1987) and 1995 

Basis: full callipering, values calculated per hectare 

D.b.h Year 1957 Year 1967 Year 1976 Year 1985 Year 1995 

classes Con Broad Con Broad Con Broad Con Broad Con Broad 

2 * * * * 6.1 37.8 4.3 87.0 2.0 * 

3 20.2 17.7 17.8 19.7 15.0 20.8 12.4 27.4 9.3 30.6 

4 22.4 13.7 21.5 14.8 20.0 17.4 12.8 15.5 10.9 15.7 

5 17.6 10.0 18.0 10.2 16.3 12.4 10.9 9.6 10.0 10.9 

6 13.4 9.3 11.9 8.0 10.4 6.8 8.3 7.8 8.1 7.9 

7 11.7 8.5 10.4 7.7 9.5 7.2 7.9 6.8 6.0 6.6 

8 10.6 9.2 9.2 8.4 8.1 7.2 6.1 6.7 5.6 6.5 

9 10.6 9.5 10.0 8.7 8.3 7.6 7.2 7.5 5.5 6.9 

10 10.6 8.8 9.9 9.1 8.7 7.8 7.4 7.7 5.7 7.6 

11 11.5 9.1 10.5 9.0 10.1 8.1 7.3 8.4 6.1 7.3 

12 11.2 6.7 10.8 6.9 10.5 8.1 8.2 8.2 6.2 7.4 

13 11.2 6.4 10.7 6.0 8.5 5.4 9.7 6.9 8.0 6.7 

14 9.2 4.6 9.7 5.0 10.5 5.8 9.0 6.2 8.0 6.5 

15 7.1 2.9 9.4 3.4 7.1 3.6 7.6 3.9 7.7 4.8 

16 4.4 1.8 5.1 1.7 5.9 1.9 7.1 3.7 6.3 3.8 

17 3.4 1.2 3.9 1.1 4.5 1.3 4.0 1.3 6.5 2.7 

18 2.8 0.7 3.3 0.7 3.9 0.8 2.8 0.7 4.3 1.4 

19 1.3 0.4 1.5 0.4 1.7 0.4 1.3 0.2 1.0 0.1 

20 2.1 0.4 2.4 0.4 3.0 0.4 4.5 0.7 3.0 0.4 

Total 181.3 120.9 176.0 121.2 162.0 123.0 134.5 129.2 118.2 133.8 

* Data not available

COST Action E4: Forest Reserves Research Network • • Proceedings of the Invited Lecturers' Reports ⁄ p. 111- 120 

HUNDRED YEARS OF VIRGIN FOREST CONSERVATION IN 

SLOVENIA 

ABSTRACT 

by Tomaž HARTMAN * 

A Virgin forest - a mighty forest cathedral - is a precious natural heritage. Nowadays, at 

the time of human and environmental crises, a virgin forest besides other things represents 

a scientific workshop of great interest. It guards some ancient but well verified messages 

on stability, security and survival harmony. 

The primeval forests in the Kočevje region, which were established and preserved a 

hundred years ago (among the first ones in Europe), are the outposts of today’s numerous 

natural reserves in Slovenia. 


»Die Abteilungen 38 u. 39 sollen als Urwald bewahrt bleiben, daher ist hier jedwede 

Nutzung ausgeschlossen.« 

»Compartments 38 and 39 have to be preserved as a virgin forest. Any use of them is 

therefore excluded«. 

(From the first forest management plan: Herzogtum Gottschee, Wirtschaftsplan der 

Betriebsklasse I. Goettenitzer Gebirge, Gueltig vom 1. Jänner 1892.) 

The above ‘short’ remark helped to conserve (among the first in Europe!) the precious 

natural heritage in the middle of vast virgin forests of the Kočevje region one hundred 

years ago. 

The first incentive to conserve the virgin forests is attributed to Dr. Leopold Hufnagel, at 

that time the central administrator of Count Auersperg’s estates. Dr. Hufnagel made an 

extensive ‘economic plan’ in 1892 thanks to Count Auersperg’s economic rationality and 

the regulations passed by the forestry administration in 1886, by which all large forest 

estates had to be utilised according to forest management plans, securing sustained yield. 

As a whole, the plan was an extraordinary work since it established naturalistic selective 

* T.H., BSc., Slovenia Forest Service, Rožna ulica 39, 1330 Koèevje, Slovenia

112 Hundred Years of Virgin Forest Conservation in Slovenia 

management for high-karst fir-beech forests - contrary to European clear-cutting practised 

professionally in those days. 

THE DEFINITION OF A VIRGIN FOREST 

‘A virgin forest is such a forest association, which is by its plant structure, composition 

and growth, a closed climatic development unit (climax) and has remained absolutely 

unaffected by any human influence. A virgin forest of such a type is a genuine virgin 

forest, and according to this definition it reflects the last well established gentle balance 

between vegetation, climate and soil. 

Wherever the activity of management (pasture, temporary wood exploitation and others) 

can be traced, either in recent centuries or far back, then we talk of a secondary or 

nongenuine virgin forest. If man interfered with a virgin forest, and has cut a tree here and 

there, where traces of this influence can still be seen, then we talk of a forest with virgin 

forest character’ (WRABER 1952). 

So demanding is the professional definition of a virgin forest. There are only over a dozen 

virgin forests left in Slovenia - i.e. forests with a virgin forest character. These are small 

areas which have not remained completely untouched. Polluted air, acid rain, copious 

game, and visitors disturb the natural development. According to the above mentioned our 

virgin forests are in fact secondary virgin forests. Though these remote forest areas have 

preserved the original spirit of nature, quietly putting through its laws over millennia. In 

the eternal succession of birth and death, life has been bound to a solid and sound system. 

Nothing here is considered to be bad or good, neither useful nor harmful. Everything that 

exists in a virgin forest is moderately regenerating, yet constantly and safely. 

It is possible that one might be disappointed by openness and accessibility of Slovenian 

virgin forests. Certainly these are not impassable tropical virgin forests, nevertheless they 

are interesting. 

VIRGIN FORESTS OF THE KOČEVJE REGION 

Vast forests of the Kočevje region on the ridges of the Gotenica mountain, Stojna and 

Rog were inaccessible virgin forests until recently. As late as one century ago this remote 

wilderness encountered the first cuttings, cart tracks were laid down, the Rog saw mill 

was built, and several kilometres of a forest railway was laid down. Traces of the first 

inhabitants have almost been erased by now, yet strong and vital fir and beech forests 

have remained. The rest of the virgin forests, which have been conserved until the present 

day, represents precious natural heritage. 

The mountain Borovška gora, with picturesque rock faces above the Kolpa river, hides 

the little known Krokar virgin forest. The rolling karst plateau is primarily covered with 

beech forest. 

The Strmec virgin forest is located at the southern slope of Stojna. The virgin forest 

fragment of a fir-beech forest is picturesque due to considerable addition of maple and 

spruce trees.


The famous karst sink at the foothills of Rog - known as Prelesnikova koliševka - boasts 

due to temperature inversion - a frost locality at the bottom - a primeval spruce forest and 

rich flora, which would otherwise be found in a cold mountain climate or far to the North. 

On the eastern slope of the summit Kopa in Rog, a smaller primeval Dinaric maple-beech 

forest - the Kopa virgin forest - can be found. 

The virgin forests Pečka and Rajhenavski Rog are magnificent fortresses of fir and 

beech; at the same time they are the best explored and most visited forest reserves in Rog. 

THE VIRGIN FOREST RAJHENAVSKI ROG 

The virgin forest Rajhenavski Rog is situate in the middle of Kočevski Rog, 1 km south 

of the former Rog saw mill, on the rolling high-karst plateau, with numerous sinkholes, at 

an altitude of 870-920 m above sea level; the prevailing exposition is N and S. 

Cretaceous limestone forms the bedrock, the soil is brown post-Carboniferous - varying 

from shallow to deep at the bottom of sinkholes. The main vegetation association is 

Abieti-Fagetum dinaricum - a Dinaric fir and beech forest. 

As to their heights, the stands are pretty uniform, of much the same height yet not evenaged; 

from the stand canopy, formed by a mass of beech and fir trees of 30-40 m, 

individual fir trees protrude, exceeding the beech by 10 m. Only few spruce trees, maples, 

elms and limes can be found in the stands. It is obvious that there - in the virgin forest 

climate and growth - only fir and beech are competitive. 

As to timber quantity, fir prevails. In total there are 251 vital trees per hectare of 10 cm 

and above in diameter; 118 fir trees - 47 %, and 133 beech trees - 53 %. There are 788 m 3 

of vital timber mass per hectare there, 449 m 3 of fir - 57 %, 339 m 3 of beech - 43 % per 

hectare. 

There are 88 dry fir trees (212 m 3 ) and 21 dry beech trees (72 m 3 ) per hectare, which can 

still be measured. 

The total timber supply of all trees in the virgin forest - vital and dry - amounts to 

1072 m 3 per hectare. 

The virgin forest of fir and beech has been growing here over millennia - since the last 

glacial period. A long life is another characteristic of virgin forest trees, 500-year-old 

giant trees are no rarity here. Trees are high and thick, reaching up to 50 m and have over 

1.5 m in diameter. Undoubtedly, for this association a huge timber quantity is the major 

weapon in its struggle for survival. A single tree can have up to 50 tons of timber matter. 

It is possible to establish up to 2000 t of timber per hectare in these virgin forests. This 

stored energy is alleviating extreme oscillations - e.g. temperature, humidity, biomass, etc. 

A virgin forest creates its own internal environment. 

In a virgin forest trees wither individually; young growth of beech immediately fills up 

stand gaps like plaster. The fir asserts itself individually among young growth of beech; it 

is possible to endure in shadow. The waiting that can last a century, and seems extremely 

long to man, represents a constituent part of life for a fir, perhaps a condition for it to 

grow into a strong tree.


Under the shelter of mature trees a new life emerges in a virgin forest. This shelter offers 

to young plants safety against snow, sleet, cold..., and represents a screen against light. In 

such conditions only the most vital trees can survive and thrive. 

Despite monolithic appearance, a virgin forest is variegated. In small areas three 

developmental phases are interwoven all the time; the regeneration phase, the mature 

phase, and the ageing phase. Spatial distribution of developmental phases, as well as the 

ratio between them, change. The proportion of the mature, optimal phase- in its full 

strength and stability, providing the forest safety and firmness - is always prevailing. 

The role of dead trees in a virgin forest is quite special. A new microcosm emerges in 

slowly decaying stems - a home and a rich table for numerous organisms like fungi, birds, 

etc. which represent an important part of the ecosystem. A dry fir tree becomes more alive 

(with micro-organisms) than it used to be when it was still a green vital tree. 

A virgin forest environment becomes more and more important, with all the accuracy 

typical of the evolution processes. It is ready for natural ‘unpredictabilities’, yet not for 

human influences - polluted air, acid rain and copious game. The automatism and 

permanence of one of the most stable natural formations has become severely endangered. 

FOREST RESERVES IN SLOVENIA 

Most of the virgin forest reserves in Slovenia have been conserved in high karst plateaus 

where fir and beech grow. Foresters - for whom natural forests are laboratories - have 

spread the net of forest reserves throughout Slovenia. 

The lowland forests (in Prekmurje, on the Karst) have also been left to natural 

development as well. Apart from the virgin forests, between the years 1970 - 1980, 170 

new forest reserves have been protected, 9000 hectares in total. According to the project, 

which started in 1997, a total of 236 forest reserves are previewed, covering the area of 

14,416 hectares. Regarding forest reserves the markings are unified. Blue colour marks 

the division limits. Information tables are placed in visible positions, directing one’s 

attention to the exceptional character of the protected area. It is quite clear, no cuttings 

will be performed here anymore, no flowers are allowed to be picked, no fire lit, no noise 

made. Foresters guide the numerous visitors. 

The following (Table 1) is the specification of the areas from the list of forest reserves in 

Slovenia, which can be called virgin forests due to the conserved character of the 

ecosystem and the designation ‘primeval, primeval character, primeval forest’: 

Within the project called Forest Reserves of Slovenia, under the patronage of the Forestry 

Institute of Slovenia, the Forestry Department of the Biotechnical Faculty, and Prof. Dr. 

Dušan Mlinšek, numerous research projects are being conducted, some of them already 

published in professional monograph form. The long-life character of a virgin forest 

ecosystem requires careful and constant recording of data, slowly building up a mosaic of 

knowledge on the life of a virgin forest. 

The net of forest reserves will become even denser; they will also be introduced ‘sound 

cells’ in the environment of other non-forest ecosystems, because the links between them 

and the variety of animal life have been severely injured in many places.


Table 1: The virgin forests in Slovenia 

Name Area (ha) 

Bukov vrh 8.00 

Ždrocle 184.26 

Krokar 74.49 

Strmec 15.55 

Prelesnikova koliševka 3.37 

Kopa virgin forest 14.05 

The virgin forest Rajhenavski Rog 51.14 

Pečka virgin forest 60.20 

Gorjanci-Trdinov vrh v.f. 23.16 

Ravna gora 15.13 

Krakovo v.f. 40.50 

Donačka gora v.f. 27.78 

Belinovec v.f. 3.25 

Šumik v.f. 19.60 

Total 540.48 

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF A VIRGIN FOREST 

Due to recording cameras it is nowadays possible to see the pre-nature of the glacial 

North, mountain wilderness, the Amazon jungle - the primeval land one is enchanted by. 

Yet, are we aware that this primeval world can be found in Slovenia, right behind the next 

hill? Rare, endangered and therefore so precious, Slovenian virgin forest is a natural 

monument and heritage which is kept with respect. 

It is not a place where tourists could indulge in; however, educational trails at the 

reserves’ margins have shown virgin forests to almost one thousand visitors annually - 

including school youths, international expert excursions, etc. Links with the public are 

contributions to the green policy of Slovenia. 

In the search for inner peace, or merely the peculiarity of decaying huge trees, and the life 

hidden therein, we are well aware that observing primeval forest is one of the keys to 

more sound coexistence and survival. A virgin forest is thus not only a classroom for a 

forester, who is becoming more and more oriented towards sustainable management, but 

it has become interesting to physicists, chemists, doctors, energy engineers, psychologists, 

etc. The understanding of interdependence between millions of organisms, climate and 

soil within the system, which is automatically developing and conserving itself through 

millennia, storing the energy, and moderately, economically yet continually regenerating 

it, is becoming increasingly important. 

It is true that all the analyses and the findings are presented for man and through man, 

who is fallible.


REFERENCES 

HARTMAN, T. (1992) Sto let varovanja pragozdov na Slovenskem. Dolenjski zbornik, Novo Mesto, 

pp. 109-116. 

HARTMAN, T. (1984) Razvojna dogajanja v pragozdu Rajhenavski Rog, T. (1984) Razvojna 

dogajanja v pragozdu Rajhenavski Rog. GozdV 42, 6, pp. 253-258. 

HARTMAN, T. (1987) Pragozd Rajhenavski Rog. Strokovna in znanstvena dela, 89. BTF, Oddelek za 



MLINŠEK, D. et al. (1980) Gozdni rezervati v Sloveniji. Inštitut za gozdno in lesno gospodarstvo 

Biotehniške fakultete v Ljubljani, 414 pp. 

SAJOVIC, G. (ed.) (1920) Odsek za varstvo prirode in prirodnih spomenikov - spomenica. Glasnik 

Muzejskega društva za Slovenijo 1, Ljubljana, pp. 69-75. 

ŠIVIC, A. (1924) O starih gozdovih na Dolenjskem. Šumarski list 11, Zagreb, pp. 564-567. 

WRABER, M. (1952) O gozdnogospodarskem in kulturno znanstvenem pomenu pragozdnih 

rezervatov. Biološki vestnik 1, Ljubljana, pp. 38-66.


Appendix A 

Figure 1: The poster presenting virgin forests of the Kočevje region 

KOÈEVSKO VIRGIN FORESTS 

Virgin forest reserves form 

a protected natural heritage 

where no living trees are felled 

and no dead trees taken away, 

where mushrooms and flowers 

are not gathered and where 

the silence is not disturbed. 

We simply surrender to 

nature. 

Forest reserves 

are marked with blue colour 

and it i s possible to walk only 

to the edge of the virgin forest 

on marked paths. 

Koèevsko virgin forests: 

1 

2 

3 4 

5 

6 

Krokar 

Strmec 

Prelesnik. koliševka 

Kopa 

Peèka 

Rajhenavski Rog 

2 

1 

3 

5 

4 

100 YEARS OF VIRGIN FORESTS' 

CONSERVATION IN SLOVENIA 

Only a century ago, the vast tablelands of Koèevsko, Rog, 

Stojna and Goteniška mo untain were still inaccessible 

virgin forests. It was due to count Auersperg's wisdom and 

ecological awareness of the forester dr. Leopold Hufnagel 

that the majestic fir and beech forests, the kingdom of bear, 

wolf, lynx and eagle were preserved to this very day. What's 

more, the wise forester was among the first in Europe to 

hand over the precious natural heritage - virgin forest - to us 

with the following brief ann otation in the forestry plan: 

:74,49 ha 

:15,55 ha 

: 3,37 ha 

:14,05 ha 

:60,20 ha 

:51,14 ha 

Departments 

38 and 39 are to be 

preserved as 

virgin forest. 

Any use of them 

is therefore 

excluded. 

The famous 

"protective" remark 

is written down in 

the first fore stry plan 

of Koèevsko: 

Herz ogtum 

Gott schee 

Wirtschaftsplan der 

Be triebsk l asse I . 

GOTTENITZER 

GEBIRGE 

Giltig vom 1. Janner 

1892


Appendix B 

Figure 2: The poster presenting virgin forests of the Kočevje region 

KOÈEVSKO VIRGIN FORESTS 

Virgin forest - a touch with prehistorical times, inner peace or just the singularity of majestic rotting trees 

- enchants us over and over again. Rare and fragile, but all the more precious for that, the intact nature is 

above all a natural monument and a heritage, cherished with due respect. 

Virgin forest - forest never touched by axe. Undisturbed, the laws of nature have ruled primeval 

forests for millenia. In the eternal cycle of births and deaths life is linked up into a healthy and firm 

system. There is no good or evil, nor useful or harmful here. Everything that exists in virgin forest is 

subject to slow but continuous and safe renewal. 

Today, virgin forest is a unique research workshop. An ecosystem that has been evolving over 

millenia all by itself, certainly deserves to be imitated. Primeval nature keeps ancient but verified 

information on stability, safety, as well as harmony of survival. 

The majesty of virgin forests is in their giant trees growing to the height of 50 metres, 

measuring over 1,5 metres in diameter, carrying up to 50 tons of wood mass and living to the age of 500 

years and more. 

Nature in the virgin forest prepares for all "unpredictable events" with the precision 

characteristic of the evolutionary process, but human influence, in the form of air pollution, acid rain and 

excessive wildlife, has an ever more critical effect.Therefore the selfsufficiency and permanence of one 

of nature's strongest forms is today seriously threatened. 

There are 12 virgin forests in Slovenia, 6 of them measuring 218 hectares altogether in 

Koèevsko region. 

Borovška mountain with its picturesque precipitous walls above Kolpa river hides the little 

known virgin forest Krokar . The rolling karst plateau is mostly overgrown with beech forests. 

The virgin forest Strmec lies on the southern slope of Stojna mountain. The abundance of 

maple and spruce trees makes the virgin forest fragment of fir and beech wood especially picturesque. 

Because of thermal inversion and frosty bottom, the famous karst hollow depression at the 

foothills of Rog, called Prelesnikova koliševka, prides with primeval spruce forest and rich flora that 

could otherwise be found in cold mountain climate or far to the north. 

Stretching over a smaller surface, there is a primeval dinaric beech-maple forest, called the 

virgin forest Kopa, 

on the eastern slope of the Kopa mountain on Rog. 

The virgin forests Peèka and Rajhenavski Rog 

are magnificient kingdoms of fir and beech 

trees. They are also the most explored forest reservations on Rog.


Appendix C 

Figure 3: The poster presenting the developmental phases in the virgin forest Rajhenavski Rog 

Koèevje 

Roška 

žaga 

VIRGIN FOREST RAJHENAVSKI ROG 

0 10 0 300m 

Podstene 

Virgin forest 

Rajhenavski Rog: 

Position: high karst plateau, 

850 - 920 m a.s.l. 

Surface: 51,14 ha 

Forest vegetation type: 

Dinaric fir and beech forest 

Abieti-Fagetum dinaricum 

Parent rock: limestone 

Stand: primeval stand of fir 

(Abies alba) and beech (Fagus 

sylvatica), with single trees of 

spruce (Picea abies), maple 

(Acer pseudoplatanus), elm 

(Ulmus glabra) and 

lime (Tilia platyphyllos). 

Development phases 1985: 

52 % optimal 

17 % opti. with regeneration 

3 % selective 

2 % over matu re 

1 % o ve r ma tu re - decay 

16 % initial under cover 

9 % ini tial wit hout co ve r 

Legend: 

forest road 

forest reserve 

Roška 

foothpath 

info table 

big tree - fir 

fir - beech forest 

forest reserve Rog 

virgin 

forest


Appendix D 

Figure 4: The poster presenting timber mass in the virgin forest Rajhenavski Rog 

VIRGIN FOREST RAJHENAVSKI ROG 

The forest environment in Rajhenavski Rog virgin forest is dominated by towering trees. It is possible 

that up to 2000 tons of biomass can be established in one hectare of a virgin forest. The enormous 

quantity of wood is unquestionably the main weapon of the fir and beech forest in its fight for survival. It 

represents the framework, the thick skin of life, the storage of energy which in this rocky karstic terrain 

can preserve the fertile soil and water, still the winds and cool the air. 

As to their heights, the stands are pretty uniform, of much the same height yet not even-aged. 

The stand roof is formed by a mass of beech and fir trees of 30-40 metres, from which individual firs are 

protruding, exceeding the beech up to 10 metres. Only few spruce trees, maples, elms and limes can be 

found in the stands. It is obvious that there - in a virgin forest's climate and growth - only fir and beech are 

competitive. 

Data 1995: On the total area - 51,14 hectares - there are 18493 alive and dead trees up 

3 

from 10 cm in diameter. Total wood mass is 54580 m . 

On 1 hectare: fir beech sum 

alive dead alive dead alive dead 

number N/ha 118 88 133 21 251 109 

3 

mass m /ha 449 212 339 72 788 284 

number of trees 

- alive - 1995 

sum 

beech 

wood mass 

- alive - 1995 

beech 

fir 

fir 

sum 

It seems that entire wood mass in the virgin forest is not 

changing significantly during the time although shares 

of beech and fir are changing. 

The ecosystem keeps its energy! 

wood mass - alive - by decades: 

3 

m/ha 

10 00 

600 

Development phases: Despite its monolithic appearance, the fir-beech virgin forest is highly 

variegated. Three stages of development are interwoven in small areas: renewal, maturity and aging. 

Optimal phase: The majority of trees always belong to the full or optimum growth stage, 

which guarantees security and stability of the forest. 

Initial phase: Trees in the virgin forest die individually, and beech shoots immediately fill the 

gaps. Slender firs grow among the young beeches, endure well in the shade. The waiting, which can last 

a century and seems to man extremely long, represents a constituent part of life for a fir, perhaps a 

condition for it to grow into a giant tree. 

Terminal phase: The role of dead trees in a virgin forest is quite special. 

A new microcosm, a home and rich table for numerous micro-organism, fungi, birds, 

which represent an important part of ecosystem, emerges in slowly decaying stems. 

A dead fir becomes more alive than it used to be when it was still a green tree. 

0 

18 92 

b eech 

19 57 

19 67 

19 76 

fir 

19 85 

sum 

19 95 

sum 

360 

1072 

year

COST Action E4: Forest Reserves Research Network • Proceedings of the Invited Lecturers' Reports ⁄ p. 121-132 

ABSTRACT 

FORESTRY IN SLOVENIA AS A PROOF OF NATURE'S 

UNPREDICTABILITY, BIFURCATION, ETC. 

by Dušan MLINŠEK * 

Slovenian forestry, its most important developmental stages, and its influences on the 

forest: destructive trends in the distant past; revitalisation of the forests in the second part 

of 20 th century, and threatening and dangerously irresponsible experiments dealing with 

reintroduction of destructive political behaviour in recent time. 

INTRODUCTION - A BRIEF PRESENTATION OF SLOVENIA AND ITS BIOGEOGRAPHICAL 

FACTS 

Slovenia is one of the very luxurious meeting points on the European continent. Let's start 

with the first surprise. The country is the only location where the four main European 

language groups meet: Germanic, Romanic, Slavic, and Finno-Ugric. At this place four 

different biogeographical regions meet: the Alps stretching from the west, the Dinaric 

Alps from the south east , the Mediterranean (sub-Mediterranean) from the south west, 

and the sub-Pannonian lowlands from the Far East. In this very small area (200 km by 

100 km) you can find elevations from 0 m to almost 3000 m within a short distance. Here 

climatic zones interchange and life conditions vary at a short range. Imposing is an array 

of climates, ranging from Atlantic to sub-Mediterranean climate, from sub-continental to 

the most harsh Alpine climate. There is quite a specific difference between the climate of 

the Dinaric Alps and the Alpine climate. In this area the climate varies within a short 

distance, and in consequence, rainfall patterns alter with precipitation from 700 to 800 

mm and up to 3600 mm. The country is very well known as the region of corridors, 

crossing from North to South and from East to West. Without going into detail you can 

imagine how huge the biodiversity is in this country, and how many and how different life 

communities are in nature, and how many things happen on the contact lines of these 

different ecosystems. 

Looking from the other aspect, the country is not far from the Mediterranean ‘desert’ to 

the South, and close to steppes to the East (so called Hungarian lowlands). In both Alpine 

zones the Alpine length of timber line is approximately 1400 km, and the length of forest 

* Prof. Dr. D.M., Department of Forestry and Renewable Forest Resources, Biotechnical Faculty, University of 


122 Forestry in Slovenia as a Proof of Nature’s Unpredictability, Bifurcation, etc. 

edge (the border zone between forest and other non forested land) is at least 40,000 km. 

Generally speaking, Slovenia is, in a way, the Southern border zone of European forests. 

SOME INTRODUCTORY INFORMATION ABOUT THE FOREST HISTORY OF THE COUNTRY 

We can imagine how diverse life was in the past centuries, specially the life of the country 

and its forests. To explain this, we have to subdivide the past into shorter periods, giving 

you some ideas concerning the most important milestones, which accompanied the life 

history, not only of humans but of life as an entity. The easiest way would be to list 

changes in forestry and of forest life in general in this part of Europe, explaining all the 

good and bad points, which influenced the forest ecosystems. 

Let's divide the life in this country into the following periods: 

– The long period before 1941 

– The post World War II period (1945 - 1952) 

– The golden period of Slovenia's forests (1952 - 1990), which represents almost 

half a century 

– The period after 1991 when the unpredictability of the coming years is present. 

WHEN IT COMES TO ROBBING THE NATURE AND ITS FORESTS WORLDWIDE, THERE IS 

NO DISAGREEMENT AMONG DIFFERENT CULTURES, DIFFERENT CIVILISATIONS AND 

DIFFERENT HABITS 

Some facts about the original sin 

There is no need to explain into detail the facts about the original sin. Humans migrated 

from the South, after having devastated their place of origin, savanna, looking for fertile 

soil. They found it in the Mediterranean forests. Using techniques they learnt in savanna 

(nomadic life, overgrazing, burning of organic material, and soil cultivation), they left 

behind the 'Mediterranean desert'. They went on to look for fertile soils in other parts of 

the continent using the same habits of their savanna ancestors, and caused the artificial 

savanna of Europe. They transformed the woody landscape into artificial landscape, 

demolishing the nature's fertility and permanently trying to improve it again because there 

were no more places left to continue this kind of robbery. Migrating across continents, 

practising these methods humans made some exceptions due to primeval fear. They 

apologised to the gods by keeping intact some groups of trees, individual trees or larger 

relicts of the original forest. 

The worst invention, the animal muzzle, was and still is the most effective killer of the 

real nature - a 'trio': a cow, a goat and a sheep. This kind of attitude continued. Later on 

heavy industry was introduced, which needs huge quantities of energy. The European 

continent is one of the most energy-poor continents, and this 'king of destruction' has 

severely damaged the real nature; specially soil fertility was heavily impaired. A normal 

next step is the existing overuse of chemicals, an attempt to improve artificial fertility of 

soil, which has a number of negative side effects.


A specially relevant fact and a sad statement of great concern is that that we are not 

supposed to talk about cultural landscape in Europe any more. This landscape has become 

an artificial savanna, a non-cultural landscape with occasional remains. 

We have to change our opinion about our ancestors completely. The ancestors who were 

not able to practice sustainable ways of life because human being became a foreign body 

in Nature. This statement needs deeper explanation. 

We have to look upon new ways how to team up with our environment. How to find 

friendly ways of cohabitation with Nature. 

SOME IMPORTANT EXCEPTIONS (FOR FORMER SLOVENIA WITHIN AUSTRO-HUNGARIAN 

EMPIRE) 

As to the way the forests were treated in continental and Mediterranean part of Europe, 

Slovenia was no exception. For all these regions, similar history of forest management 

can be written (the theory and practice about even-aged forestry, spruce monocultures, 

clear-cuts, much the same silvicultural systems, etc.). But rather early we could find some 

exceptions in Slovenia due to its special geographical position, and these showed 

completely new ways of forest management. These were probably the result of 

excessively ruined landscape in this part of Europe, i.e. the disappearance of forests in the 

sub-Mediterranean part of Slovenia, the removal of forests of up to 1/3 of the original size 

in the most of Slovenia, overexploitation, overcutting, overgrazing in forests, litter 

collecting, animal fodder collecting, and pollarding in those still existing forests. The 

Slovenian landscape became a torrential landscape, from the Alpine to the sub-Pannonian 

region. It is not surprising that very early the Vienna Forestry School developed the 

science of 'how to protect lives against torrents and avalanches'. The history tells us about 

other exceptions when authorities, forestry organisations, and some individuals started to 

be concerned with new ways how to manage the forests in an appropriate, more or less 

close-to-nature way. 

The example of Josef Ressel as a representative of foresters' 

sustainable way of thinking 

Let's begin with re-naturalisation of the Karst landscape in the sub-Mediterranean region 

of Slovenia. The Karst area was completely ruined for a very long period. In the mid 

19 th century there was only 5 - 10% of shrub vegetation distributed in small spots of the 

Karst area. Because of these changes living conditions became very severe. Eroded rocky 

landscape, drought, heavy winds, extreme heat in vegetation period, overgrazing, lack of 

fuel, etc., have contributed to poor living conditions in this area. The land was partly 

abandoned. Foresters were the first to start rethinking and to look for new ways to restore 

life in this part of Slovenia. There are few foresters who started to re-establish the forests 

in this area. Already in the mid 19 th century the forester - generalist Josef Ressel, mainly 

employed by the Austrian navy, started to plant new forests in a different way. The 

foresters experimented with the so called 'climax tree species' (broad-leaved tree species), 

and finally found a pioneer tree species (Pinus nigra) to fit the climate. Josef Ressel was 

by nature an inventor, and he became known for many of his patents (e.g. the steamer


screw), but from forester's point of view he was famous because he started to develop 

landscape planning already in those days; not only to re-establish the forest, but also to 

improve life on the Karst in its entity. Ressel was an individual beginner, and was 

interdisciplinary oriented. His sparkling ideas and a mass notion were needed to set this 

belief in motion. Today, after 1000 years of destruction and ruining of the countryside, 

approximately 70,000 ha of new forests - partly planted, partly naturally regenerated with 

a growing stock of approximately 120 t/ha - are striving very successfully in the course of 

re-vitalisation of the landscape in this part of Slovenia (new trends of life, new energy 

householding in the landscape, etc.). In parallel with Ressel's activities, other foresters 

self-initiatively started to follow similar ways but there was a slight difference in opinion 

between Ressel and these foresters, who looked at the problem less holistically. The Karst 

area of present-day Slovenia can be shown as an example of how to renew forests in a 

devastated landscape world-wide. 

Hufnagel and his 'Selection Cutting System' 

At the end of the 19 th century Leopold Hufnagel, the well known Austrian forester, 

decided to change the treatment of forests belonging to big forest owners in the southern 

Slovenia, the forest enterprise of Auersperg family (many thousands of ha). He started 

with regular selection silvicultural system in the forest of Abieti-Fagetum dinaricum at the 

time when Austrian forests were heavily overcut, and there were no large dimension trees. 

At the same time in the forest management plan Hufnagel declared some virgin forests to 

be protected. This was the first time that virgin forests were protected as a forest area. In 

those days this was done mainly for hunting purposes. 

Schollmayer's revolutionary turning-point and a different way 

of thinking in forestry 

Schollmayer was the director of a huge forest property belonging to the Windischgrätz 

family in Postojna. He developed the so called 'Control Method of Postojna' at the 

beginning of the 20 th century. Heavily overcut forests in this area, due to the construction 

of the southern railway (Vienna-Trieste), and the severely devastated Karst area in the 

vicinity, were the reason for his efforts. This new way in forestry meant the beginning of 

scientifically and practically oriented 'cognitive way' in forest management (area of 

25,000 ha). This happened parallel to the introduction of the Control Method in 

Switzerland. There was quite a difference between the Swiss and the Postojna method. In 

Postojna this method was intended for a huge area of forest. At the same time some 

additional investigations were carried out in Postojna. This revolutionary step happened at 

the time when, for example, in Styria (Austria) approximately 4500 farmers and forest 

owners bankrupted because of completely ruined forests, and the same was happening in 

other parts of Europe (JOHANN 1985). Schollmayer was multidisciplinary oriented and an 

active forester whose basic ideas were accepted and later perfected as a general rule in 

Slovenia in the distant future. 

A brief remark: There were some exceptions. At the same time farmers already practised 

the so-called ‘Bauerliche Plenterung’ and tried to practice sustainable forestry. This 

phenomenon was very important but far less successful.


THE FIRST PROHIBITION OF THE CLEAR CUT SYSTEM IN YUGOSLAVIA BETWEEN 1920 - 

1941 

At the time of the first Yugoslavia, Slovenian foresters had to look for work in different 

places of the country, mostly in Bosnia, Macedonia, and partly in Croatia. At that time the 

forests, like in other parts of Europe, were heavily exploited. In addition, a severe 

economic crisis worsened the situation. Overcutting, etc., continued and few 

improvements were made in forests. At that time forestry was part of the Federal Ministry 

of Forests and Mines, and severe disproportion between forests and devastated forests, 

e.g. Karst and shrub area, (out of total 9 million ha of forests, 3 million ha were heavily 

devastated) pressed the politicians to forbid such extensive treatment of forests as the 

clear-cut system. But there was little success because this prohibition was by-passed and 

the clear-cut system was renamed the strip-cut system. 

THE NEW FOREST LAW OF FEDERAL YUGOSLAVIA AND ITS ECOLOGICALLY SOUND 

ROOTS BASED ON MANY FACTS - MEETING AT THE SAME TIME AND AFFECTING THE 

BIFURCATION POINT (TURNING FROM MECHANISTIC TO HOLISTIC WAY) 

Yugoslavia was an exception in the Communist world, in which forest management was 

seriously taken into account. It was an experiment on how to stop exploiting the forests 

and to start considering forests in a close-to-nature way. The new Forest Law of Federal 

Yugoslavia was the basic law, which the Republics had to follow. This law imposed the 

rules to Republic forest laws. The federal law, in effect since 1949, strictly forbid clearcutting 

in forests and proclaimed it as the most dangerous and unnatural technology 

applied by forest management. The clear-cut prohibition is a confirmation that this law 

was written in accordance with the nature protection idea. Slovenia followed the federal 

law very strictly because of its bad experiences, and incorporated additional nature 

friendly regulations into its own forest law. 

Some facts causing the turning point 

It is worth mentioning some facts that caused the turning point in forestry, from 

exploitation forestry to close-to-nature forestry: 

1. Overexploited forests of 3 million hectares of shrub and Karst countryside - the good 

part of 9 million hectares of the total forest area in Yugoslavia. 

2. The return of Slovene foresters from the southern parts of Yugoslavia after WW II, 

with the idea to stop the forest devastation practised especially in the southern 

Yugoslavia and in Slovenia as well, and with the best wishes to start a new way of 

forest treatment at home. 

3. General opposition to the capitalistic kind of nature exploitation and to clear-cutting, 

which damaged Slovenian landscape very heavily in the past. 

4. Already during the war the activity of the Forest Committee was the concern of the 

partisan movement preparing the first rules for the after-war period. 

5. Development of social sciences in general.


6. The influence of the new science in its pioneer status - the holistic way of the new 

science on the horizon. 

7. The danger of short-term economic trends and the distrust of modern technologies. 

8. A permanent conflict between the FAO policies and the diverse Middle-European 

conceptions how to treat forests. 

Remark: The intention of FAO was to increase the quantity of biosubstance. But 

the Middle-European forestry is trying to improve itself by increasing the quality 

of wood and improving other forest functions at the same time. 

Simultaneously some other measures have been taken (e.g. collecting litter and pruning of 

trees for litter purposes was strongly forbidden; grazing in forests was also forbidden; 

etc.). 

THE PERIOD 1945 - 1950 

Immediately after the Second World War the situation dictated additional heavy felling 

due to general severe economic post-war situation. Slovenia was not the only country 

where overcutting was practised. This was the case all over Europe. In this post war 

period West Germany, for example, has clear-cut 750,000 hectares of forest. The Soviet 

Union cut completely the old-growth in the European part of the Union. In Slovenia the 

overcut happened mostly along roads, damaging the forests locally. In this five-year 

period the felling reached more than 50% of the average annual cut. Only in some years 

the overcut was from 100% to 200%. Classic tools were used (no chain-saws, tractors, 

etc.), and the magnitude of damage was rather low with some exceptions. We must 

mention that public opinion was against heavy cutting and helped to shorten this period of 

overfelling successfully. We have to emphasize that this post World War II era was 

characterised by the practices mentioned before all over Europe at that time. 

In the years 1947-1949 the prohibition of goat-grazing in Yugoslavia was successfully 

enforced. During this short period between 5 - 7 million goats were slaughtered or sold to 

Greece and Turkey. In this very short term goats disappeared completely except in 

Kosovo, and in the area around Knin in Croatia, where at that time Serbs were still living. 

In Slovenia at that time goats were not a serious problem any more, and their removal was 

rather an easy task. There is one point of great significance: this action made by former 

Yugoslavia immediately after the war, in spite of the difficult economic situation, was an 

immense contribution to the protection of nature, never seen world-wide before. After 40 

years, in this once shrubby country inhabited by goats, you can nowadays find forest 

stands of 10 - 20 m height covering and protecting the slowly forming soils, life in 

general and increasing biodiversity. 

1950 - 1990 THE TRANSITION PERIOD OF PRACTICE - FROM MECHANISTIC TO ORGANIC 

WAY OF THINKING AND ACTING IN FORESTRY 

Half of the century has nearly passed and it is time to analyse the work done in Slovenian 

forests. Let's consider some facts with critical evaluation. After clear-cutting and similar 

extensive forest treatments had been forbidden, the less experienced foresters started to 

practice the selection cutting system (Planterung) in all forests. In a few years they


realised that this was not possible. At that time an interesting idea arose - 'the tending of 

forests in all circumstances has to be the basic conception - the theory and the practice of 

forestry in Slovenia'. It was evident that tending has to be considered as a guiding 

philosophy and technology at the same time. In other words, tending became more than 

technology. Thinning became the main activity in Slovenia due to prevailing young 

stands. It took a certain period of time to introduce selection thinning by supporting the 

best and most vital individuals instead of practising ‘negative thinning’ (the strict removal 

of badly formed, damaged or sick individuals). Thus the Slovene forester recognised 

today's character of human being as a foreign body in the forest rather early. 

The next very important step was the recognition and respect of the Iron Law of Site. In 

the post war period 50 - 70% of forest sites have been phytocoenologicaly mapped at a 

scale of 1:10,000 (mostly with the method of Middle European Montpelier school of 

mapping). The work has to continue on a new level, following the fact that site and living 

part of matter are inseparable units. 

The historical legacy and the introduction of ‘The Control 

Method of Postojna’ in all Slovenia's forests 

In Slovenia forest management is based on the Control Method of Postojna for all forest 

categories. All forests have been measured on average 3.5 times (at ten-year intervals the 

growing stock of over 10 cm breast diameter is measured). Ressel, Schollmayer, Hufnagel 

and others foremost contributed to this trend. Additionally, silvicultural planning was 

elaborated scientifically and introduced as an obligatory activity for all forests. This was 

an important help to regard and treat each forest stand successfully in a 'cognitive way'. 

The abandonment of goats continued, along with the grazing prohibition for all domestic 

animals. 

The impulses of the post World War II enthusiasm influenced all kinds of activities in 

forestry in general. But there was quite a different situation in other parts of Yugoslavia. 

In the south, Macedonia was oriented to afforest huge areas of spoiled agricultural land. 

Afforestation was one of the most important activity in neighbouring Serbia. But less 

attention was paid to tending of the existent forests. In Bosnia the conversion of coppice 

was the principal assignment because approximately 50% of the total forest area was 

coppice. In Bosnia additional significance was given to the existing high forests - in many 

instances with a virgin forest character. Conversion of these forests to economically valid 

ones, but at the same time to those of close-to-nature ones, was the second main task 

while improving their forests. Croatia's forest activities were directed into three directions. 

The first was to improve the selection cutting system in the Dinaric Alps. The second was 

to improve the famous lowland oak forests, and the third was to continue afforestation in 

the Karst coastal zone. 

If we discuss the cognitive method of forest management it is very important to mention 

that Slovenia was divided into 14 forest management areas. This was already in the years 

of 1950. At the beginning the background for this division was the raw material for wood 

industry. But very soon this division was subordinated to new trends. It was the question 

of how to solve the trends and influences of ‘globalisation and localisation’ in the country 

as a very important part of cognitive approach in practising work in nature. The


localisation was stressed systematically with intention to get globalization trends under 

control. Within each forest management regional unit, local management units were 

established where ‘control method’ was practised. In addition the growing stock of more 

than 10 cm breast diameter was totally measured every 10 years. This happened 3 - 4 

times over the last 40 years. The marking of trees for cutting became an organic part of 

silvicultural planing as a special part of cognitive treatment of Slovenia's forests. 

After World War II the ‘Monetary Forest Fond’ was established for forest recovery. 

Subsequently this establishment was renamed and transformed into the fund source called 

‘Biological Amortisation’ and each m 3 cut financed it. Certain percentage of timber price 

(18 - 33%) was put aside for maintenance and improvement of forests in general. In fact, 

this was the beginning of so-called ‘ecological accounting’, which has to be developed in 

the future and introduced in general as one of the main measures for forest improvement. 

Therefore it is worthwhile mentioning that by reason of 'biological amortisation' tax 

payable on forests by forest owners was very low. 

Network of new forest reserves 

In the period of 1970 to 1980 one hundred and seventy-six (176) new forest reserves were 

established in Slovenia, encompassing 10,000 ha. They include forest representatives of 

the most forest sites in the country. The main idea was to elaborate new laboratories in 

nature investigating the reality of forest life. The project is still alive and is the basis for 

the achievement explained hereafter. 

Education - research - improvement of practitioner workshops - 

as a TRIANGLE and an effective tool in advanced forestry 

The triangle with its feed-back function was introduced by the Faculty of Forestry to 

enhance activities in forestry, to improve forester's knowledge, and to keep them informed 

with up-to-date findings. At the same time first class mechanism was established to 

provoke feedback from education, research and improvement.... This was the way how to 

manage energy rationally and be informed constantly. In the past decades (since 1959) we 

pointed out that no sufficient attention was paid to the public. In the future the triangle has 

to change into tetrahedron, including the public as well. 

Forestry, silviculture and its tending as a paradigm and not 

technology (Forestry as the Nation's culture) 

The ideas presented in the above sentence tell us that forestry in Slovenia has to continue 

this way, and further on, it has to develop forestry in a broader sense as the culture of the 

country. It has to act as a teacher for other human activities, educating them how to 

develop and implement the 'protective role' into different man activities, and bringing 

them to a cultural level. - With another words - the forest as a teacher. 

At this point I would like to mention some leading persons in forestry, who have 

contributed to trends and happenings brought up before. Besides some politicians, the 

following foresters and biologists are to be mentioned: Funkl Lojze, Košir Živko, Pipan


Rudolf, Sotošek Stanko, Anton Šivic, Tomažiè Gabrijel, Tregubov Vlado, Maks Wraber, 

and also some farmers and forest owners. All of the above mentioned were mostly 

foresters or scientists. 

FLUCTUATIONS AS THE ORGANIC PART OF NATURE - AND OUR EXPERIENCE 

After 1990 the forest law was changed - some important principles were kept, but 

‘biological amortisation’ - this superb invention - was left out. 

Former bad habits practised in forestry are back (revitalisation of grazing, etc.). Instead of 

improving the existing methods with good results, they would like to call back the past 

century. But we hope very much that this is the transitional period after which the 

sunshine of the last decades is going to shine again on the Slovenia's forests. 

We learned a lot in the past period. Forestry encountered different kinds of crises and 

conflicts, with politicians and non-friendly science branches like agriculture. Let me list 

some of them. In the first decade after World War II there were fights going on between 

agriculture and forestry regarding the question of the borders between agricultural and 

forest land. Slovenia is mostly a mountainous country with rather steep slopes and for 

agricultural purposes farmers cut down forests on these slopes. Farmers cut down the 

forests due to the lack of agricultural land for more convenient farming. Under such 

conditions natural fertility was drastically reduced and forest vegetation started to cover 

these areas again. Forest pioneer vegetation is still increasing. People who do not 

understand basic ecology do not realise that the return of forest vegetation means the 

recovery of landscape. We have learned that we have to follow nature, learn from chaotic 

situations (note that man’s aggression on nature means in fact chaos, and we have to 

correct our contacts with nature). 

Worth mentioning is another conflict that happened in the 60's when Slovenian 

agriculturists and politicians tried to develop broader agriculture via additional artificial 

deforestation of Slovenia's landscape in different places. At the beginning the idea was to 

remove 170,000 hectares of forests to gain new agricultural land (around 1960). After a 

strong reaction from foresters this figure was reduced to 150,000 hectares and again down 

to 70,000 hectares. After scrutinising carefully the pros and cons this figure dropped to 

14,000 hectares. All together only 7,000 hectares were deforested finally, and turned to 

agricultural land. But half of it (3,500 ha) was given back to forestry immediately after the 

clear-cut. We can imagine how serious the fight was between the foresters and the 

'artificial savanna protagonists', and how speculative the opposite side behaved. One of 

the secret goals of the opposite side was to get timber for trading. The discussion at that 

time was disagreeable due to some foresters (delinquents) who took the agriculturists' 

side. Foresters have to anticipate such and similar nature unfriendly attacks again and 

again, and have to be ready to fight them. From experience they have to foresee such 

similar and chaotic situations, and they should deal with them. The example shows how 

unfriendly some science branches are concerning the protective role of environment - in 

this case forests.


FROM TRIANGLE TO TETRAHEDRON 

Forest as an enemy 

Considering the development of relations between humans and forests throughout the 

history we can conclude that in most cases man was an enemy to the forest. He destroyed 

it, establishing artificial ecosystems like foreign bodies, which oppose nature and its laws. 

When man is educated in different school systems his activity appears as something 

positive. We are compelled to recognise this mistake and reveal the truth about man and 

nature. 

Forest as a friend - as a friend for life! 

Recognising this fact man has to admit that the forest has to be accepted as his friend. We 

have to stop exploiting forests and develop a new philosophy in our woody country where 

man and forest become friends. Man has to trust the history only to a certain extent 

because of huge unpredictability of already severely spoiled nature. On account of this 

fact friendship between man and nature has to progress in a specific way based on our 

cognitive investigation of nature. 

Inventive ideas brought by individuals need general public to 

proliferate 

There are many examples where individuals like Schollmayer, Ressel, etc. produced 

original ideas through cognitive practice, spreading them for the benefit of the public. 

Foresters have to start teaching people about sustainability, biodiversity, iron law of 

locality, the importance of globalization versus localisation. These ideas, which play a 

very important role, have to be explained to the public objectively and ecologically and 

without political implications. 

Extension service as the main tool in the future 

The extension service has to become one of the main tools of foresters in the future as 

part of tetrahedron reviewed in the previous chapters. That means the extension service 

has to became an organic part of research, teaching, and practice as one unit based on 

cognitive conceptions. The new forester has to develop the new forestry on a high cultural 

level with responsibility. In other words, the forester has nothing to do with extension 

service agriculturists practised till now. Forestry as a topic has to become the organic part 

of educational programmes at all school levels (from primary schools to colleges 

producing educating teachers). In the future, considering all these facts, the foresters of 

the country (The Forest Service) have to add themes on real nature of forests to the 

regular curricula.


NEW FORESTRY AS A PROCESS 

New forestry and new approaches when considering Nature 

As mentioned before forests must not be considered as a kind of agricultural produce. 

They have to be considered as a permanent process, as part of real nature. And if so, the 

forestry as a human activity has to be organised as a process that perpetuates a large scale 

of activities. 

Such forest activity has to transform the existing previously mentioned 'artificial savanna' 

into nature-friendly woody landscape. Forestry is obliged to bring back the forests, which 

are acceptable to nature. Today this is not the case. World-wide we are still far away from 

transforming the existing woody 'sceneries' into the really multi-functional forests. Going 

this way the society is obliged to abandon the existing agro-pasture system which is the 

major destroyer of the natural landscape. It has to be stressed: stop promoting the agrosewage 

way like in Holland, in Lowlands of the Po river, etc. Stop the development of the 

wrong perfection of intellect when Schreber gardens become graves (by using chemicals 

and putting on 'make-up' to nature's dead body). 

Considering all these facts we have to realise that the modern economy, which is far away 

from nature's economy, is responsible for all its acts when it contracts debts in Nature and 

makes the coming society poor. All these trends have nothing in common with 

democracy, because the real democracy respects not only the present man but also 

creative predecessors and the coming generations as well. If doing so, we will finally and 

slowly understand the 'responsible democracy'. All these new trends in forestry 

characterise this branch of human activities as the foregoer. In this area other branches 

have to learn how to develop in the future. 

LOOKING UPON THE NEW ECOLOGICAL NICHE OF MAN AS CONCLUDING REMARKS 

The preceding considerations suggest a new ecological niche of man especially in 

forestry, i.e. nature friendly man, who is holistically oriented, contacting nature in a 

cognitive way, which is beside other things the basic part of life behaviour. 

In Slovenia we should be proud that already today our forests are treated in this manner 

and we can show other countries how the forests in Europe should look like in the future. 

Going this way we have been permanently learning how to be educated by forests, where 

the real sustainable development of man - not a greedy eater - can be studied. In other 

words, the dynamic science of the new forestry has to help promote the new science, 

which is already on the horizon: among others - a new forestry with forestry sciences as a 

'non-excessive cultural process'. If not, we will not be allowed to speak about close-tonature 

forestry, and we will not be able to solve the most critical landscape problems. This 

will be our contribution when bringing back the real forests to the continents (as the most 

important ecological regenerator), and at the same time an efficient counterweight and 

medicine for artificial landscape, from where mother-forest was banned. 

Nature is solving problems of the ruined landscape by bringing back the forest 

ecosystems - and we have to follow this example. This has to be considered with extreme 

seriousness. Because the present time is howling, but the future will whisper.


SUMMARY 

The history of humans from A to Z is characterised by permanent robbery of nature, of 

direct and indirect environment. Especially natural resources were and are still affected, 

and the history must be studied when dealing with damaged natural productivity of soils 

and devastated forests. No continent is an exception to this. A special case is the 

European continent, where the process of destruction started very early, and where an 

attempt was made to revitalise the original landscape. But this is evident only in some 

places and it is an exception. In some European countries this revitalisation can be 

registered. Slovenia is one of them. 

In short, the history of Slovenia’s forests and forestry is shown. Particular attention is 

given to the second part of this century. During the revitalisation period the forests 

recovered very successfully. The paper discusses some measures which are oriented 

towards the basics and are part of the existing forestry. The cognitive method (special 

relation: man - environment) has been developed as the fundamental part of forestry and 

also as part of Nation’s culture. Due to this interesting improvement no opposition was 

expected after 1991 when the political regime changed. But that was exactly what 

happened. Thus we can solemnly claim "Do not believe the History"! The cognition has 

ripened - forestry must not fail. Forestry as a culture means new tasks for forestry based 

on the very important statement that nature is indispensable. Forestry has to further 

improve the alphabet of man's new relations towards nature through wisdom experienced 

in natural forests. That means that forestry is obliged to bring this knowledge and this 

relationship to other activities of man and to human behaviour in general. 

REFERENCES 

JOHANN, E. (1985) Geschichtliche Darstellung der Nutz- und Schutzfunktionen des Waldes in den 

Gebirgsregionen der ehemaligen k.k. österr.-ungar. Monarchie. In: Beiheft zur Schweizerischen 

Zeitschrift für Forstwesen, 74, Zürich, 75 pp.


FOREST RESERVE RESEARCH IN SWITZERLAND 

SHORT DESCRIPTION OF THE FOREST 

History of forest utilisation 

by Jean-Francois MATTER * 

As in many other European countries, the forests in Switzerland have been submitted to 

uncontrolled and excessive exploitation during the 18 th and the first half of the 19 th 

century: the situation prior to 1850 was disastrous, mainly in the Alps and Pre-Alps, with 

frequent avalanches and flood disasters. The first federal Forestry Policy Act came into 

force in 1876, but covered only the mountain region. Our forests were managed only in a 

sustainable way, when a stricter Forest Policy Act was introduced for the whole country 

in 1902. Its aim was to stop the depletion of the forests, to manage the remaining forest 

areas in a sustainable way, and to reforest wherever it was necessary to protect people and 

property. Since the introduction of this law, the forest area in Switzerland has increased 

by about 40%. A new law has been in force since 1993. It further refines prudent forest 

management. It also guarantees the biodiversity of the Swiss forest and its sustainable 

development, a policy which combines economy and ecology, as called for by the 

UNCED Environment Summit held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. 

Art. 1 Waldgesetz (Forest Law) (purpose): 

1. This law: 

a) preserves the forest in its area and spatial distribution; 

b) protects the forest as a close-to-nature ecosystem; 

c) ensures the forest's ability to fulfil its functions, i.e. protective, social and 

commercial (forest functions); 

d) promotes and sustains forestry. 

2. In addition, it helps protect people and important assets against avalanches, landslides, 

erosion and rock-fall (natural events). 

The ‘modern’ principles of this new law are: 

– Promoting a diverse composition of tree species which are compatible with each 

other and the environment (in accordance with natural silviculture). 

– Preserving, through natural regeneration, the genetic diversity of tree species 

growing in the region which are typical of the site. 

– Banning of the clear felling (already 1902). 

* J.-F.M., Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, ETH-Zentrum, HG G 67, CH-8092 Zurich, Switzerland

134 Forest Reserve Research in Switzerland 

– In addition to naturally managed forests, unmanaged forests are allowed (natural 

forest reserves). 

– Preserving or reinstating forms of forest management, i.e. coppice-with-standards 

and chestnut orchards, to promote diversity on the ecosystem and the landscape. 

6% 

Characteristics of forests 

26% 

39% 

29% 

Percentage of Forests in the Main Regions 

40% 

24% 

33% 

Land Use in Switzerland 

forest 

agricultural land 

settlements 

unproductive areas (lakes, cliffs 

etc.) 

23% 

46% 

Jura 

Mittelland 

Pre-Alps 

Alps 

Southern Alps


Forest area, ownership 

Forested Area 

Unit of estimation: total forest area 

Jura Mittelland Pre-Alps Alps Ticino Switzerland 

Forested area in 1000 ha 195,0 228,2 217,0 381,6 164,5 1186,3 

% distribution 16,4 19,2 18,3 32,3 13,9 100,0 

% forest in the total area 39,7 24,2 32 8 22,7 46,4 28,7 

m 2 forest per capita 2100 600 2600 6300 6200 1900 

Ownership 

Ownership Jura Mittelland Pre-Alps Alps Ticino Switzerland 

Citizens corporations 31 25 13 39 66 34 

Political communities 34 19 10 26 8 21 

Public corporations 1 5 20 10 2 8 

Cantons 9 7 6 2 1 5 

Confederation 0 1 1 1 1 1 

Total of publicly owned forest 75 57 50 78 78 69 

Privately owned 23 40 43 17 21 28 

Corporations 2 3 7 5 1 3 

Total of privately owned forest 25 43 50 22 22 31 

Total forest in % 100 100 100 100 100 100 

Total forest in 1000 ha 195 0 228 2 217 0 381,6 164,5 1186.3 

Total volume 

Species Composition (Standing Volume) 

Unit of estimation: accessible forest, trees with a DBH of 12 cm or more excluding brushwood 

Total per 1000m 3 


63574 92785 88139 97481 23148 365128 

m 3 /ha 328 409 417 292 176 333 

%


Tree species 

Species Composition (Standing Volume) 

Unit of estimation: accessible forest, trees with a DBH of 12 cm or more excluding brushwood 

Species Jura Mittelland Pre-Alps Alps Ticino Switzerland 

Spruce 31 43 58 63 35 49 

Silver fir 22 15 22 6 6 15 

Pine 4 5 1 5 2 4 

Larch 0 1 0 13 15 5 

Cembran pine 0 2 0 1 

Other conifers 0 1 0 0 0 0 

Total conifers 57 65 81 89 58 74 

Beech 30 20 13 7 13 16 

Maple 4 2 2 1 0 2 

Ash 3 5 2 1 2 2 

Oak 3 5 1 0 3 2 

Chestnut 0 14 1 

Other broadleaves 3 3 1 2 10 3 

Total broadleaves 43 35 19 11 42 26 

Total in % 100 100 100 100 100 100 


Growth 

% 

63574 92785 88139 97481 23148 365128 

Estimation #1: 8.1 Mio. m 3 /year 7.4 m 3 /Year/ha (‘Derbholz’) 

Estimation #2: 6.2 Mio. m 3 /year 5.4 m 3 /Year/ha 

Annual cuttings (1980 - 1985) 



925 1721 846 662 69 4223


HISTORY OF THE ESTABLISHMENT OF NATURE RESERVES (PROTECTION AREAS) 

– 1906 Motion in the Swiss Forestry Association to create natural forest reserves. 

The first three reserves were created by the Association of Nature Protection: 

– 1910 primeval forest reserve Scatle / Brigels (Pro Natura) 

– 1914 National Park (Pro Natura) 

– 1933 Aletschwald (Pro Natura) 

Since 1940, creation of scientific strict forest reserves by Prof. Hans Leibundgut, former 

professor of silviculture: national and international promotion. 

– 1947 Moos / Birmensdorf 

– 1948 Swiss Working group for forest reserves (University Institutes) 

– 1949 Forestry World Congress Helsinki 

– 1987 39 scientific strict forest reserves with 1018 ha 

– 1993 New forest law 


The inventory is now on its way to be completed by the Federal Forest Service (1998). 

The first overview shows the following figures: 

– 234 reserves with 13,529 ha (=0.3 % of country area or 1.1 % of forest area) 

• National Park 4,800 ha = 35 

• Mean area 234 res = 30 ha 

• 13 reserves with area > 100 ha 

• 39 strict reserves FIT 

• 80 with interventions for conservation 

The new forest law foresees strict reserves as well as reserves with intervention; the 

contracts of protection must have a minimum duration of 50 years. 

DEVELOPMENT OF RESEARCH IN NATURAL FORESTS 

Method: 

Preliminary studies: soil, vegetation, stand composition and structure. 

Full inventory 

Sampling plots with / without coordinates 

Line transect 

Remote sensing 

Dendrochronology


PRESENT STATE OF RESEARCH ON NATURAL FORESTS 

– Federal Institute of Technology, chair of silviculture (Prof. Dr. J.-Ph. Schutz): 

Research in natural forest is one of the five main research domains (responsible: J.- 

F. Matter): Management, monitoring and evaluation of the FIT reserves. 

– Federal Institute of Technology, Geobotanical Institute (Prof. Dr. P.J. Edwards): 

Botanical observation program in the 39 FIT reserves. 

– Universities of Bern, Fribourg, Neuchatel and Lausanne: punctual observation 

programs in some FIT reserves (Vegetation science, Zoology) 

– Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research, Research 

Department Forest Monitoring, Section Forest Condition Inventory and Long-term 

Monitoring (Dr. J.L. Innes): Long-term Forest Ecosystem Research LFTER in FIT 

and new forest reserves, and in managed forest areas 

– Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research, Research 

Department Landscape Ecology, Section Vegetation: Vegetation and Forest 

reserves (Dr. N. Kuhn): Punctual botanical observations in FIT reserves and in 

managed forest areas 

Swiss Forest Reserves Register 

No. Name/Commune Surface 

(ha) 

1 ALETSCHWALD 

RIED-MOEREL 

2 

MOOS 

BIRMENSDORF 

3 KRUMMENLINDEN 

MELLIKON 

4 PFINWALD 

SIDERS 

5 DERBORENCE 

CONTHEY 

6 ST. JEAN 

VILLERET 

7 GIRSTEL 

STALLIKON 

8 BONFOL 

BONFOL 

9 UMIKERSCHACHEN 

UMIKEN 

10 UNTERWILERBERG 

BADEN 

Year Legal status 

244.80 1933 Tenancy for 99 years through the Swiss 

Association of Nature Protection 

.99 1948 Tenancy for 50 years through the 

Institute for Silviculture ETHZ 

3.00 1955 A decree of Canton Forest Service 

6.10.1955 / 50 years 

6.77 1957 Tenancy for 20 years through the 

Canton Wallis 

50.80 1957 Purchase through the Swiss Association 

of Nature Protection 

8.74 1957 A decree of government council of 

Berne by 27.9.1957 

9.63 1957 

1981 

Purchase through the Institute for 

Silviculture ETHZ 

8.80 1961 A decree of government council of 

Berne by 21.8.1961 


Directorate for Constructions of canton 

Aarau 

3.42 1962 By the decision of the Commune 

Ortsburger



(ha) 

11 WEIDWALD 

OBERERLINSBACH 

12 SCATLE 

BRIGELS 

13 REUSSINSEL + RISI 

MELLINGEN 

14 BOIS DE CHENES 

GENOLIER 

15 FOLLATERES 

FULLY 

16 KYBURG 

KYBURG 

17 ADENBERG 

RAFZ 

18 FUERSTENHALDE 

WEIACH 

19 HUENTWANGENHALDE 

NOK-HW EGLISAU 

20 VORM STEIN 

STADEL 

21 TARICHE BOIS BANAL 

ST.URSANNE / F.ETAT 

22 TARICHE HAUTE COTE 

ST.URSANNE / F.ETAT 

23 BOEDMERNWALD 

OBERALLMEINDKORP. 

24 LEIHUBELWALD 

ORTSBUERGERG. GISWIL 

25 SEELIWALD 

KORP. SCHWENDI 

26 BANNHALDE 

POL.GDE.BUELACH 

27 LANGGRABEN 


28 RINSBERG 


29 SELDENHALDE / WUTACH 

SCHLEITHEIM 


5.10 1963 A decree of the community council of 

Aarau 22.2.1963 

9.13 1964 Tenancy for 80 years through the Swiss 

Association of Nature Protection 

4.05 1966 A decree of the Canton Forest Service 

14.3.1969 / 50 years 


Canton Waadt 


Canton Wallis and Confederation 

2.11 1970 Purchase through the Institute for 








9.96 1971 

1973 

Purchase through the Canton ZH 

Scientific adviser: Institute for 


















4.50 1972 Eig. Randenvereinigung SH 

Scientific adviser: Institute for 

Silviculture ETHZ



(ha) 

30 STRASSBERG 

BACHENBUELACH 

31 WEIDEL 

STALLIKON 

32 JOOSENWALD 

WALENSTADT 

33 NATIONALPARK 

ZERNEZ 

34 ROTTENSCHWILERMOOS 

ROTTENSCHW/UNTERLUNK 

35 RHEINHOELZLI 

FLAACH 

36 STEIBRUCHHAU 

OSTERFINGEN 

37 TOBELWALD 

GISWIL 

38 COMBE GREDE 

VILLERET 

39 COMBE BIOSSE 

DOMBRESSON LePAQUIER 




.60 1975 Property of the Swiss Confederation 

School forest of the ETHZ 

85.36 1976. Tenancy for 50 years through the 


26.00 1977 A project of the national fonds 

19.00 1977 Fondation Reusstal 



5.20 1979 Tenancy through the Department for 

Forest and Wood Research ETHZ 

4.53 1981 Property of the ETHZ 

96.49 1982 Property of the Canton Bern 

58.00 1987 State forest NE 

Cantonal decree ->epfz_pend. 

39 FOREST RESERVES WITH THE TOTAL AREA OF 1,018.46 ha 

The editor’s annotation: For printing purposes this article was transferred from the draft 

version presented at the meeting in Ljubljana. We regret any eventual mistakes which 

occurred during the printing process.


Appendix A 

An example of forest reserves record in the Swiss forest reserves databank 

Waldreservate der Professur für Waldbau / Departement für Wald- und Holzforschung / ETH Zürich 

Nr (No.) 2 

Kanton (canton) ZH 

MOOS 

Gemeinde (commune) BIRMENSDORF 

Fläche(ha) (area) 0.99 

Gründungsjahr(e) 

(the year of establishment) 

1948 

Grundeigentümer 

(proprietor) 

HOLZKORPORATION BIRMENSDORF 

Rechtsform Reservat PACHT 50 JAHRE / WALDBAU ETH / 11.11.47 

(legal status) 

(Tenancy 50 years / Institute for Silviculture ETH) 

Waldtyp (forest type) EHEM. MITTELWALD UND HOCHMOOR 

Bemerkungen (notes) 

LK 1:25000 Nr. 1091


Appendix B 


(Continuation) 

ZUSAMMENSTELLUNG DER AUSGEFUEHRTEN ARBEITEN 

(A list of the accomplished work in the reserve (analyses, research)) 

**************************************************************************************** 

RES.NR.: (No.) 53/125 - 13 

RESERVAT: (reserve) REUSSINSEL + RISI 

GEMEINDE: (commune) MELLINGEN 

GRUENDUNGSJAHR: 1966 (established in the year) 

EINRICHTUNGSJAHR: 1961 (equipped in the year) 

JAHR KONTROLL- 

GANG 

UNTERHALT AUFNAHME AUSWERTUNG BEARBEITUNG PROFIL 

GEZ. 

(year) (check-up 

round) 

(maintenance) (records) (analysis) (data processing) (side view) 

1961 * * * * 

1968 * * 

1969 * * * * 

1971 * 

1973 * * * 

1975 * 

1976 * 

1977 * 

1979 * 

1983 * * 

1984 * 

1988 * * * 

1989 * * * 

ANDERE ARBEITEN (additional activities) 

1973 Aufnahme = Insel (recording = island) 

1977 ZAUN INSEL (fence island) 

1983 Freisägen des Wanderweges (pruning trees along the footpath) 

1989 Vermessung (measurements)


Appendix C 


(Continuation) 

PHYTOSOZIOLOGISCHE AUFNAHMEN DES GEOBOTANISCHEN INSTITUTES 

(phytosociological mapping of geobotanical Institutes) 

VEROEFFENTLICHUNGEN + DIPLOMARBEITEN 

(publications + diploma works) 

1958 MOOR, M. PFLANZENGESELLSCHAFTEN SCHWEIZERISCHEN FL AUEN. 

MITT. SCHWEIZ. ANST. FORSTL. VERSUCHS., 34, 4 

1969 HARTL, H. VEGETATIONSKUNDLICHE NOTIZEN ZUM WALD- RESERVAT 

'RISI' BEI MELLINGEN AG SCHWEIZ. ZEITSCHRIFT F. 

FORSTWESEN 

1969 HELLER, H. LEBENSBEDINGUNGEN UND ABFOLGE DER FLUSSAU 

VEGETATION IN DER SCHWEIZ. EAFV, 45, 1. 

1970 KLOETZLI,F. ZUR PFLANZENSOZIOLOGISCHE STELLUNG DER WALD 

VEGETATION IM RESERVAT 'RISI' SCHWEIZ. ZEITSCHRIFT F. 

FORSTWESEN 

1972 RAPPO,H. ANALYSE DE LA STRUCTURE DE LA RESERVE FORESTIERE 

DU RISI (MELLINGEN). TRAVAIL DE DIPL. INST. SYLVIC. EPFZ 

NR.177.

COST Action E4: Forest Reserves Research Network • Proceedings of the Invited Lecturers' Reports ⁄ p. 145 - 171 

STRICT FOREST RESERVES IN EUROPE -- EFFORTS TO 

ENHANCE BIODIVERSITY AND STRENGHTEN RESEARCH 

RELATED TO NATURAL FORESTS IN EUROPE 1) 

ABSTRACT 

by Jari PARVIAINEN * 

Original forest structures are very rare in Europe. In 1995, COST Action E4: Forest 

Reserves Research Network was introduced by the COST Commission in order to 

promote co-ordination and enhance research in natural forests. The objectives are to 

create a European network of forest reserves, to collect ongoing research, to unify and 

standardise research methodology and to provide general access to a central data bank on 

forest reserves. 

In order to maintain forest biodiversity in Europe, it is necessary to protect totally 

untouched reserves and to apply nature-oriented silviculture in production forests. Natural 

forests are generally accepted as being a good model on which to base nature-oriented 

silviculture. There are still approximately 3 mill. hectares of natural forests left in Europe 

(1.7% of the total forest area). The widest, continuous natural forests can be found in 

Finland and Sweden and in remote mountainous areas of Central and Eastern Europe. 

Key elements of forest biodiversity have been identified, such as fire disturbance, dead 

wood component, etc., but their quantification is still very vague and speculative. The 

application of realistic nature-oriented silviculture requires a concerted effort to protect 

indigenous biodiversity, the influence of which has been underestimated in discussions on 

forest protection. 

Due to the wide variation of human impact on forests, fragmentation, the degree of 

‘naturalness’ of forests, vegetation zones and tree species composition, the concept of 

nature-oriented silviculture in the Nordic countries differs markedly from that in Central 

Europe. In the boreal zone the main emphasis lies on maintaining biodiversity, whereas in 

Central Europe the goal is to manipulate forest stand development towards the potential, 

original forest cover. In Central Europe, production forests are mainly artificial through 

alteration and cultivation practices (50-70%), whereas production forests in Finland and 

1) 

Reprint from: Jari Parviainen et al. (eds.), Research in Forest Reserves and Natural Forests in European 

Countries, EFI Proceedings No. 16, 1999 

* Dr. J.P., Finnish Forest Research Institute, Joensuu, Finland

146 Strict forest reserves in Europe 

Sweden are semi-natural; here between 70 and 75% of forests result from natural 

regeneration. 


Forestry and silviculture have attracted unprecedented public attention in the 1990s world 

wide and throughout Europe. The following events have contributed to this development: 

– Forest sustainability conferences and international conventions, protocols and 

agreements (Rio-declaration 1992, Ministerial Conferences for the Protection of 

Forests in Europe, in Strasbourg 1990 and Helsinki 1993, Helsinki Process, 1993, 

IPF-IFF United Nations Initiatives, since 1994) 

– Forest-certification discussions (ITTO criteria, development of FSC, ISO-14000norms, 

EMAS-environmental accreditation-systems and the introduced “country of 

origin-“labels) 

– Climate change forecast and agreements (Kyoto 1997, Forests as sinks in carbon 

balance calculations) 

– Low economic profitability in wood production and the use of wood as a 

renewable natural resource in Europe (ecobalance calculations) 

– World wide campaigns promoting forest protection and those against the 

deforestation of tropical forests (e.g. introduced 10% – limit of WWF- 

International, i.e. protection areas ‘hot spots’) 

Due to these developments, demands to change silvicultural practices and to protect the 

remaining remnants of natural forests in Europe have increased perceptibly. The 

application of traditional silviculture practice has changed and terminology has had to be 

reassessed. As a result of these developments and discussions, the current concept of 

silviculture includes, apart from wood production, an emphasis on maintaining forest 

biodiversity, recreational, landscape, protective and socio-economic, as well as cultural 

issues. 

Biodiversity in forest ecosystems 

The Helsinki process in 1994 defined the components of biodiversity in forest ecosystems 

(see Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe 1993, 1994 and 1996, 

Interim Reports on the Follow-Up of the Second Ministerial Conference 1995). With an 

ever-increasing amount of knowledge currently being generated these definitions seem to 

have been validated. Based on these definitions, endangered species are seen as indicators 

of change in forest ecosystems. Changes in the number and frequency of endangered 

species act as a warning if biodiversity becomes impoverished due to silviculture 

techniques. Thus, a number of endangered species have to be continuously monitored in 

order to asses ‘forest quality’. 

There are two approaches to maintaining biodiversity in forests: protection of vulnerable 

and rare ecosystems and sympathetic silvicultural-oriented practices being applied in 

production forests. For example, at a regional level, each country must implement 

protection measures in relation to rare and valuable forest ecosystems and a network of 

protection areas should be created. The density, representatives, size and the total 

protection areas in the network depends on the variability and types of forest stands, 

vegetation zones and forest condition. The general concept is that the protection network


should include, apart from old forests, other stand compartments at various stages of the 

development cycle. 

Because total protection only secures a certain number of habitats and rare species at a 

very local scale, silviculture is essential for maintaining large-scale biodiversity in 

production forests, regionally. This includes the majority of forested areas, which in many 

countries means at least 80-90% of the total forest area. Silvicultural orientation in 

forestry practices determines the amount of forested areas, which are to be left completely 

outside commercial forestry activities. The hypothesis is that the closer to nature 

management activities are in production forests, the less there is a need for total protection 

of forests. 

Natural forest is generally accepted as a suitable model for the realisation of natureoriented 

silviculture. It is, therefore, necessary to study the various types of natural forests 

extant in Europe and apply results obtained to silviculture, where possible. The following 

summary outlines some preliminary results from the European-scale research project 

COST Action E4. 

COST ACTION E4: FOREST RESERVES RESEARCH NETWORK 

The primary aim of the COST Action E4: Forest Reserves Research Network, which was 

introduced by the COST Commission in 1995, is to promote the co-ordination and 

enhancement of research effort in natural forests in Europe. This would be achieved by 

the creation of a European network of forest reserves in order to gather ongoing research, 

to unify and standardise research methodology and to provide access to a central data 

bank for the exchange of research results. 

COST is a framework for scientific and technical co-operation, which encourages the coordination 

of national research programmes on a European level. Within this framework 

financial support is given for the organisation of meetings, specific co-ordination tasks 

such as data bank construction and for the exchange of scientists through the Short Term 

Scientific Missions-programme. The research being co-ordinated is funded nationally. 

GOALS of the Action are to: 

– compile and analyse all available information on forest reserves and ongoing 

research 

– provide an inventory of published research reports on natural forests and forest 

reserves 

– develop and harmonise research methodology for monitoring forest structure and 

ecosystem change 

– promote the establishment of a permanent sampling plot system 

– create a data bank for gathering information on forest reserves 

– achieve a common consensus on terminology, management approach and 

protection status for forest reserves 

The main outputs of the action will be a publication of country reports with data and 

definitions on forest protection and an inventory of research in natural forests and 

reserves, and a review of the models and methods for describing the structure of natural 

forests. A data bank on forest reserves, organisations, publications, research and primary 

results with unrestricted access for the participants will be established. This data bank on


European forest reserves will be located at the European Forest Institute, Joensuu, 

Finland. 

Of all the “natural forests” in Europe the most relevant category to this Action are those 

which are strictly protected. They have been left to develop uninterfered with by man, in a 

state which is as original as possible. Most of these remnants are located in forest reserves 

and are generally protected by statute (see Figure 1). 

19 European countries are involved in the project. The project is scheduled to last for four 

years ending in November 1999. 

Detailed information was collected before the approval of this project between 1992 and 

1995. The IBN-DLO Institute in the Netherlands organised the first European Forest 

Reserves Workshop in 1992 in Wageningen and devised a questionnaire on forest 

reserves (BROEKMEYER / VOS 1993). 

A feasibility study on undisturbed and semi-natural forests in Europe was carried out by 

the European Forest Institute (EFI) in 1993, which was later accepted by the EU as a 

COST project. As its output, in 1994 EFI produced a series of research reviews on 

structure, succession and biodiversity of undisturbed and semi-natural forests and 

woodlands in Europe (SCHUCK, PARVIAINEN and BÜCKING 1994; PARVIAINEN, SCHUCK 

and BÜCKING 1995). The Action is currently structured around three working groups: 

Management Committee (consisting of country delegates) 

Chairman: Jari Parviainen, Finland; Vicechairman: Konstantinos Kassioumis, Greece 

Working Group I 

Network creation 

Winfried Bücking, Germany 

Working Group II 

Research methodology 

Eduard Hochbichler, Austria 

Task Force / Working Group III 

Data bank 

Risto Päivinen, EFI, Finland 

• definitions and terminology of protection areas 

• characteristics of existing reserves 

• a bibliography inventory 

• criteria for measuring forest stand,structure and 

regeneration 

• layout of the sampling plot system in forest 

reserves 

• creation of a typical on-line electronic database 

for forest reserves 

• standardisation of data collection 

Prior to the end of October1998 the Action had organised the following meetings and 

excursions: 

– 1st Management Committee Meeting in Brussels, Belgium, 4th of March, 1996


– 2nd Management Committee Meeting in Fontainebleau, France, 12/14th of 

September, 1996 

– WG 1 meeting in Freiburg, Germany, 23/24th of January, 1997 

– WG 2 meeting in Göttingen, Germany, 21-23rd of April, 1997 

– 3rd Management Committee Meeting and Working Group 1 and 2 joint meeting in 

Finland, 30th of July-3rd of August, 1997 including a scientific excursion to forest 

reserves in Finnish Lapland and Russian Karelia 

– 4th Management Committee and WG 1 and 2 joint meeting in Brussels, 24-25th of 

November, 1997 

– 5th Management Committee and WG 1 and 2 joint meeting in Ljubljana, Slovenia, 

26.-28th of May, 1998, including a scientific excursion 

– 6th Management Committee and WG 1 and 2 joint meeting in Vienna, Austria, 

15.-18th of October, 1998, including a scientific excursion 

Figure 1: Forests relevant for the research in COST Action E4 

Country area 

Forest area 

Unmanaged 

protection 

areas 

Different categories 

of protection 

• National parks 

• Strict reserves 

• Old forest 

protection areas 

• Wilderness areas 

• etc. 

Experimental forests, plots and 

areas in production forests 

(e.g. thinning, reforestation) 

Comparison between 

managed / unmanaged 

forests 

Permanent sampling 

plot system in ‘free’ 

development forests 

Research for 

stand structure 

• biodiversity 

• productivity 

• silvicultural 

management 

The Action has also promoted research exchange under two calls of the Short Term 

Scientific Missions (STSM): scientists from 15 countries took part during 1997 and 1998 

in a total of 20 missions.


PRIMARY RESULTS FROM THE COUNTRY REPORTS AND SOME OF THEIR POTENTIAL 

APPLICATIONS 

Types of natural forests extant in Europe 

It is difficult to provide a conclusive summary of the amount and area of natural forests in 

Europe because the policies and degree of forest protection varies a greatly from country 

to country. Apart from local climatic and edaphic conditions, reasons for these differences 

include traditional use of forests, their degree of originality, regional variation in 

continuous forest cover and concepts of protected areas, as well as permitted 

interventions. 

During last 10-20 years in the Nordic countries, the primary goal of forest protection has 

been the preservation of old forest remnants. This type of forest protection maintains 

fauna, flora and other living organisms not subject to commercial forest operations. In 

contrast forests in Central Europe are protected as part of the wider landscape, as cultural 

entities or as specimens of ‘original’ nature. 

In North America and Canada the reserve ideology applied in forest protection results in 

large, continuous areas being demarcated and left untouched. This kind of protection 

strategy is suitable in areas which, due to low population pressure, have not been affected 

by man to any great extent. Canada has been able to declare over 12% of its forests as 

legally protected. In addition, roughly 30% of commercial forests are essentially reserves 

because some of them are situated far from populated areas and have therefore, no human 

or industrial value. 

This type of ‘reservation’ concept cannot be applied to the densely populated European 

Continent, where forests have been subjected to human influence for thousands of years. 

In Southern and Central Europe forests gave way to human settlements and were reduced 

to forest islands during the Middle Ages at the latest. Because of settlement activities such 

as hunting, mining, glass works and traffic, forested areas adjacent agricultural land were 

under constant pressure due to human activities (BÜCKING et al. 1994: ROMANE 1997). 

Contrary to what is generally believed, human impact on forests in Northern Europe has 

also been extensive, though not as continually as in Southern and Central Europe, lasting 

mainly for only for 300-400 years. In Finland, between the 17th and the 19th centuries, 

forests were used for tar production, hunting and reindeer husbandry (PARVIAINEN and 

SEPPÄNEN 1994). During the same period, forests in Central-Sweden and Central-Norway 

were largely impacted upon by the ore mining industry (ESSEEN et al. 1997). 

The principal activity which had most impact on Finnish forests was slash and burn 

agriculture; it was especially used during the settlement period of the entire southern part 

of Finland and was initiated during the 16th century. According to HEIKINHEIMO (1915), 

as much as 50-75% of the Finnish forests were subjected to the slash and burn method 

before the beginning of this century. However, in Finland and Sweden, the most 

significant changes to the forest environment occurred during the last century, due to the 

rapid expansion of the forest industry. 

Due to the continuous use of forests historically, there are few original, untouched virgin 

forests remaining in Europe. The largest virgin forests can be found in the boreal forest


zone from the European side of the Russian Federation, in the states of Komi and 

Archangelsk and in some parts of north-west Karelia near the Finnish border. 

The European forest protection concept has been devised to be more versatile than that 

which exists in America. Forest protection includes different degrees and types of 

restrictions on forest areas with regard to their use. Forests selected on a regional basis 

combine to form a network. In Finland, for example, protected forest areas are located in 

the following areas: national parks, strict nature reserves, wilderness areas, protected 

peatlands, protected old forest areas, protected lake shores, herb-rich forest protection 

areas, ridge protection areas and protection forests of Lapland created to prevent shifting 

of the northern timber line. The EU/Natura 2000 -programme focuses on the protection of 

habitats which are especially valuable for birds and flora. In Finland, the protected forest 

areas with different categories amount to 15% of the total forested area (see Fig. 2, cf 

Table 1). 

In terms of protecting mammals and birds there is a significant difference between Central 

European and Nordic countries where, in the latter, protected forests and production 

forest compartments are adjacent one another. Due to the continuous mosaic-like forest 

cover, large land animals, such as the bear, are able to move freely over the entire 

Southern Finnish region. Compressed by people, Central European forests have been 

fragmented into forest islands. Forests are mainly bordered by fields, settlement, roads or 

industrial plants. There are plenty of buffer zones, but large, continuous forest cover has 

disappeared. Borders between protected and production forests are generally vague in 

Nordic countries compared to the rest of Europe. 

When comparing forest protection areas in different European countries the most 

interesting feature is the amount of strictly protected forests (Fig.1). They have been left 

to develop freely in a state which is as original as possible. The COST project, Forest 

Reserves Research Network, has outlined the various concepts and definitions related to 

protected areas and the amount of untouched forests extant in different European 

countries (SCHUCK et al.1994 – see Table 1 in Appendix 1). Preliminary estimates suggest 

that there are about 3 mill. ha of natural forests left in Europe, i.e. 1.7% of the total forest 

area. Their number cannot be further increased, but what is left, must to be carefully 

preserved and protected. The majority of these natural forest remnants are legally 

protected. 

The largest continuous natural forest areas occur in Finland and Sweden, and in the 

mountainous regions of Central and Eastern Europe. The proportions of natural forest of 

the total forest area in Bulgaria, Romania, Finland, Austria, and Germany is 8%, 6%, 

5.5%, 3% and 0.8% respectively. No natural forests remain in the Netherlands, whilst in 

Finland, there are 1.3 mill. ha of natural forest, which is circa one percent of the total 

forested area of Europe and nearly 43% of the European natural forest estate. 

The use of ‘Natural forests’ in silvicultural model 

It is generally accepted that natural forests are a basic model for the realisation of natureoriented 

silviculture (LEIBUNDGUT 1978, 1982, 1986, 1989; SCHÜTZ 1986; SCHMIDT-VOGT 

1991; THOMASIUS 1992; STURM 1993; PARVIAINEN / SEPPÄNEN 1994). It is, therefore,


necessary to analyse what types of natural forest exist in Europe and how they can be 

utilised as experimental areas for silviculture. 

Figure 2: The area of forests and other wooded land and the total area of protected forests 

in selected European countries in 1998. (The different categories of protected forests 

outside of normal forest operations, mainly protected forest areas with rare and vulnerable 

ecological value, not areas for landscape management or protection from avalanches or 

erosion. Definitions based on national definitions. See also Table 1 in Appendix 1). 

Though natural forests may be the basis for the realisation of nature-oriented silviculture, 

the natural forest model needs some conceptual clarification. It is necessary to distinguish 

between close-to-nature and nature-like silviculture (LEIBUNDGUT 1986; SCHMIDT-VOGT 

1991; THOMASIUS 1992; STURM 1993; EDER 1997). The definition of close-to-nature 

silviculture implies that the development cycles of natural forests are mimicked and 

nature’s own development potential and productivity are used in production forestry. In 

other words, management activities are guided, as far as is practical, by observed, natural 

forest dynamics. In nature-like silviculture, natural forest processes are transferred 

directly into silviculture. The latter, however, cannot always be the primary goal of 

sensible forest management because hazards and risks are not controlled in nature. If left 

entirely at the vagaries of natural forces, forestry would become economically 

unsustainable and would occasionally result in disasters occurring over large areas, e.g. 

fire, devastation by insects. 

Natural forests develop in different ways throughout the various alternative vegetation 

zones. The development of northern, natural boreal forests is interrupted by disturbances 

and catastrophes, which destroy forest over large areas, thereby promoting forest 

regeneration. The most important disturbance factor in the boreal ecosystem is fire. Even 

today, millions of hectares of forest in any one year may be destroyed by fire over vast, 

untouched forest areas in Canada and Russian Siberia. Depending on factors such as 

moisture and the tree species composition, forest fires occur at intervals of between 30 

and 120 years in the boreal zone (ESSEEN et. al. 1997). In peatland, on wet soils and on


islands, forest have probably been able to develop for centuries without disturbances, 

including fire. In such cases, forest regeneration occurs through gap dynamics, i.e. 

through the death of solitary trees in so-called short cycles (KUULUVAINEN 1994). 

In contrast, large scale disturbances and natural disasters are an exception in the temperate 

forest zones of Central Europe (SCHMIDT-VOGT 1991; THOMASIUS 1992). Occasionally, 

storms destroy forests on a large scale. The decisive factor here is the prevalence of the 

short cycle, which results in forest regeneration through gap dynamics. In Central Europe, 

this is especially true in the typical mixed beech/spruce/fir natural forests where shadetolerant 

trees are able to regenerate, even under a very dense canopy layer. 

Due to differences in the development cycles of natural forests, area of forest cover and 

differences in traditional forest uses, the concept of nature-oriented silviculture is 

different in the Nordic countries compared to Central Europe. In Nordic countries, in 

particular, silvicultural trends focus on the differences between long and short rotations or 

cycles, fire ecology and those stand characteristics which are crucial with respect to the 

preservation of living organisms. These factors include the presence of charred wood, the 

proportion of decaying wood, small biotopes and an emphasis on deciduous trees 

occurring throughout the stand. Silviculture is the management of coniferous forests. In 

order to maintain biodiversity on a regional scale, landscape ecology planning policies 

have been developed, the primary aim being the maintenance of a mosaic-like structure at 

a regional level (KOUKI 1994; ANGELSTAM 1947; ANGELSTAM / PETTERSON 1997). 

Today, remaining remnants of natural forests may serve as valuable reference areas and 

research areas to aid in the attainment of objectives related to silvicultural management. 

In Central Europe the basic principles of close-to-nature silviculture have generally been 

based upon gap dynamics, especially disturbances and light factors inherent in short forest 

cycles. The main goal is to elucidate, on a site-specific basis, the potential, original 

vegetation cover so that the altered tree species composition can be managed towards the 

original tree species composition for each particular site, as far as is practical (THOMASIUS 

1996). Silviculture favours mixed forests dominated by deciduous trees (SCHÜTZ 1986). 

There is some demand for leaving strict reserves adjacent to production forests, which 

could serve as reference sites, thereby enhancing nature-oriented development in 

production forests (Der Wald hat ein Problem ... 1996; MAYER / SPELLMANN 1997). 

The most relevant guiding factor in Central European silviculture has been the definition 

of naturalness (THOMASIUS 1996; KOCH et.al. 1997; Naturnähe Österreichischer Wälder. 

Bildatlas 1997; PETERKEN 1997). Generally speaking, naturalness in silviculture refers to 

those conditions and processes which have been affected negligently by man. The concept 

of hemeroby is thus defined, as applied to forestry. It implies the development of forest, 

uninterrupted or impeded by man, towards a natural climax state. This means potentially 

natural forest association where man has no longer interrupted the development and the 

vegetation has had time to develop up to its final state. In addition, the definition of 

naturalness helps to define the present quality and state of forests that exists in different 

countries. 

The definition of naturalness is, however, not clearcut. There are many overlapping or 

closely related terms such as native, ancient woodland, virgin forest, old growth forest, 

primary forest and old forest (PETERKEN 1997). Furthermore, decisions will have to be 

made on how human impact will be accounted for in the definition. Account must be


taken of domestic-use of wood, the acquisition of heating and firewood or past selective 

felling, the results of which are still visible in the stand, and the impact of forestry 

practices which occurred 100 years ago. Also ‘naturalness’ classes will have to be defined 

on a proportional basis and adjusted to fit local conditions. 

Austria, during the early 1990’s, was the first country in Europe to carry out an inventory 

of the naturalness of its entire forest estate (Naturnähe Österreichischer Wälder. Bildatlas 

1997). The following figures provide some examples of the naturalness of forests extant 

in a number of European countries: 

Austria Inventory results, published 1997, forest area 3.9 mill. ha 

natural forests 

semi-natural forests 

moderately altered forests 

altered 

artificial 

total 

3% 

22% 

41% 

27% 

7% 

100% 

Germany Alteration of tree species composition in Prior to change 

the Black Forest (BÜCKING et. al., 1994) at time Ch.b. today 

spruce 3% 45% 

beech 53% 19% 

conifers 23% 65% 

broadleaves 77% 35% 

exotic tree species 

(douglas fir, red oak in whole Germany) 

- 4% 

Great Britain (PETERKEN 1997) 

67% plantations with exotic tree species (sitka, spruce and others) 

83% of all ancient woods extend to no more than 20 ha 

Finland (PARVIAINEN / SEPPÄNEN 1994) 

regenerated trough planting or by sowing 5.2 M ha 23% 

natural regeneration 17.8 M ha 77% 

in total 23.0 M ha 100% 

absence of exotic tree species 

Sweden (ESSEEN et. al., 1997, Statistik Δrbok för skog, 1996) 

regenerated by planting 6.5 M ha 28% 

natural regeneration 17.1 M ha 72% 

in total 23.6 M ha 100% 

exotic tree species, 

plantings with P. Contorta 0.5 M ha 2%


From current and historical data and records on forest structure, it is clear that Central 

European production forests are mainly altered or cultivated, whereas in Nordic countries, 

they are semi-natural. Even though about a quarter of forests have been established by 

sowing or planting in Finland and in Sweden, many resemble primary forest after fire 

succession due to the presence of natural seedlings in the regeneration areas, and the 

development of to be more or less mixed forests. Stand development is primarily 

influenced by management of these seedlings, especially thinning. 

The need to elucidate biodiversity factors 

The most important silvicultural development in the 1990s has been the focus on 

biodiversity factors in management. Research on forest biodiversity has expanded rapidly 

in recent years. In spite of this, quantification of, for example, how much dead wood to 

leave or how many key-biotopes should be left in forests to preserve threatened species, 

has not as yet been clarified. Decaying and hollow trees are important for the maintenance 

of biodiversity in both deciduous and coniferous forests because they support thousands 

of species, especially insects and decay fungi. In northern boreal forests, it has been 

calculated that about 35% of all threatened species are dependent on dead wood (ANNILA 

1998). To put biodiversity into perspective, when all species in the Nordic countries are 

considered (c. 25 000), only 3,6% of the threatened category occur in forests. According 

to OECD- statistics (1991), 38% of mammals, 33% of birds, and 16% of vascular plants 

are threatened in Western and Middle European countries. The respective numbers for 

Finland are 11%, 6%, and 6%. 

In Nordic countries it is estimated that not more than 2/3 of the known, threatened species 

can be preserved by silvicultural practices (ANNILA 1998). Little is known of up to 1/3 of 

these, some of which are extremely rare. Such species are most likely to have been rare 

even before the commencement of intensive forest production. There have been only 

occasional observations made of these species. In contrast, studies show that the number 

of threatened species in temperate zone forests varies according to the development stage 

of the forest and tree species composition. Both species number and diversity vary, 

depending on the age of the forest. 

According to recent Finnish studies on threatened species, 90% survive adequately in 

production forests. The majority of the remaining species have always been rare and only 

appear in specific sites that differ markedly from the neighbouring ecosystems. These 

habitat types, which are known as key biotopes, are hardwood stands, herb-rich forests, 

grassland forests, ridges, rocks and gorges. These key biotopes are not considered for 

silvicultural purposes and are left untouched in order to preserve rare species. According 

to ‘quality’ analyses of silvicultural methods implemented in private forests, the key 

biotopes cover approximately 6% of the total forest area of Southern Finland (NIEMELÄ / 

ARNKIL 1997). Coincidentally, this figure is very similar to an estimate of key biotopes in 

German forests, i.e. 6-8% of the total forest area (Naturschutz im Wald 1997). 

The recommended share of dead wood in production forests obviously depends on the 

composition of tree species and the stand-structure. A general recommendation is to leave


2-3% dead wood of the total growing stock, which in Nordic countries amounts to about 

5-8m3 per hectare (PARVIAINEN / SEPPÄNEN 1994; WOLLSCHLÄGER 1996). A similar 

percentage has also been estimated for central European forests. In the temperate zone, 

however, a figure of 2-3% means double the amount of dead wood per hectare must be 

left compared to the boreal forest zone (Naturschutz im Wald 1997). An alternative 

method is to estimate the share of dead wood in each stand relative to a corresponding 

natural forest stand and to leave 10-12% of the volume of dead wood normally found in 

the latter (KORPEL 1997). Research is inconclusive as to what proportions of the total 

dead timber should be fallen and standing. Most common estimates suggest that the bulk 

of dead wood should be fallen, decaying wood. 

Recommendations of the amount of fallen, decaying wood vary from 60 to 80% of the 

total dead wood component. 

From the point of view of preserving living organisms and enhancing biodiversity, open 

areas should also be created in forests. If regeneration in high forests was replaced 

entirely by selection forests, open areas and their attendant living organisms, would 

disappear. In Finland, there are dozens of such species. Correspondingly, one of the 

drawbacks of fire prevention in modern silviculture is the extinction of living organisms, 

which are dependent on charcoal wood. There are about 40 such species in the Nordic 

countries. This is why the modern silvicultural guidelines recommend controlled burning 

in production forests in order to ensure adequate micro-habitats on a small scale for those 

organisms which are dependent on fire and charcoal wood (ANNILA 1998). 

Additional costs to modern silviculture as a result of managing 

biodiversity 

To date, no detailed economical calculations as to how much additional expenses will be 

incurred due to the incorporation of biodiversity aspects in silvicultural management, and 

whether wood production is reduced significantly. In practice, if the deadwood 

component is made up poor quality timber, useless for logging, it will not cause 

unreasonable additional costs to maintain the required deadwood volume. Practical 

guidelines favour fallen dead wood, because manual logging can be dangerous if standing 

dead trees fall during forest operations. However, if mechanical harvesting is applied, this 

danger can be averted. 

According to a report on private forests in Finland, volumes would decrease by 5 to 7% if 

key biotopes are left, in addition to the required proportion of dead/decaying wood 

(NIEMELÄ / ARNKIL 1997). Preliminary calculations for Southern Finland suggest that the 

application of such techniques in modern silviculture would cause a reduction of about 

10-12%, at most, in wood production, over the long term (JÄRVELÄINEN et al. 1997). 

Similarly, here are no precise, published estimates in Middle Europe or Germany on the 

differences between ecological- and wood production-oriented silviculture. The city of 

Lübeck forests are a rare and important example of the implementation of ecological 

silviculture, which began in 1994. In Germany, a so-called Naturland-certificate may be 

awarded if ecological silviculture is applied. The requirements are: no clear cutting, no 

exotic tree species, no chemicals, selective felling only is allowed, 10% of the forest areas


must be set aside as reference areas, i.e. strict reserve areas, and the dead wood 

component must amount to 10% of the total tree volume. 

The forest area around the city of Lübeck is an optimal site for European beech (Fagus 

sylvatica). During previous commercial forest activities, exotic tree species – especially 

Norway spruce, but also red oak and Douglas fir – were planted in the region. The longterm 

plan now is to develop the forest into beech dominated stands and to remove 

Norway spruce stands in favour of mixed forests. Other exotic tree species, such as 

Douglas fir, will not be maintained. 

In January 1998, an independent evaluator (BORCHERS) published a report on the forests 

of the city of Lübeck, which assessed the economic implications as a result of current 

forest management. According to this report, the reduction in the level of silviculture and 

the establishment of reference areas created losses in wood production and increased the 

expenses related to silvicultural management amounting to between 80 and 240 DM 

/year/ ha. In conclusion, BORCHERS stated that this kind of forest management is only 

possible in forest parks, where there are no silviculture-related expenses. Thus, this type 

of silvicultural model is really only applicable in forests which are owned by cities or 

communities like Lübeck, where the additional costs can be covered by tax revenues. In 

private forests such silvicultural practices are unprofitable. However, the silvicultural 

model applied in the city of Lübeck does sets guidelines for ecological silviculture and 

quantifies the economic losses resulting from its implementation, which is of considerable 

benefit to the forest community generally. 

CONCLUSIONS: NO UNIFORM SILVICULTURAL MODEL EXISTS 

There is no uniform silvicultural model in Europe. In order to maintain biodiversity, 

different silvicultural and regeneration methods are required. Which methods to choose 

depends on the following parameters; climate, soil and tree species characteristics. At 

present, the main trend in European forestry is toward nature-oriented silviculture. The 

basic elements of nature-oriented silviculture are known for each forest zone, but the 

quantification of the properties that dictate how ‘natural’ silviculture is, have not been 

studied sufficiently and are not well understood. Quantification is required of such aspects 

as the amount of deadwood and the key biotopes that should be left. There is general 

agreement that by leaving deadwood and micro-biotopes in production forests a 

proportion of threatened species may be conserved. Nature-oriented silviculture serves 

both as large-scale protection of biodiversity and timber production, but thus far, the 

significance of the former remains underestimated in the general debate on forest 

protection. The feasibility of nature-oriented silviculture must always be evaluated on 

economic grounds. Experience shows that sustainable forest management has been most 

successful when forestry is profitable. 

In order to preserve natural species diversity there must be open areas created in forests. If 

silvicultural orientation favours selection forests only, those species that live at the edge 

of forests and in open areas would become increasingly rare. It is necessary to carry out 

prescribed, controlled burning during regeneration procedures in Nordic countries, in 

order to conserve those species that are dependent on wood charcoal.


Research on biodiversity factors should be further consolidated and enhanced. There is an 

increasing need for an inter- and multi-disciplinary approach in order to link silvicultural 

management to zoological and botanical disciplines. Old, comparative, permanent 

experimental plots are important, because by re-analysing them, new data on untouched 

forests, and to varying degrees, managed forests, may be obtained, even in the short term. 

By increasing knowledge relevant to the implementation of nature-oriented silviculture, it 

will be possible to offset the continuing clamour for changes in silvicultural management. 

Though nature-oriented silviculture in Europe must be defined carefully as knowledge 

increases, it can be concluded that the greatest threat to the quality of forests and their 

sustainability in Europe are external factors that emanate outside the forest, as opposed to 

underdeveloped silvicultural method. Air pollution poses an increasing threat to Central 

European forests. Carbon dioxide emissions and greenhouse gases, resulting in possible 

global warming are threats to forests, especially in peripheral areas in the north and on 

mountain slopes. It is necessary to reduce and monitor emissions on an international scale. 

Silvicultural procedures cannot eliminate for these effects. However, these effects can be 

offset, to some degree, by altering silvicultural operations. 

In Europe, a serious problem is the underutilisation of forest growth. Annual fellings are 

only 65-77% of the annual growth. In order to maintain forests’ resistance to outside 

factors, wood usage in Central Europe as well as in the Nordic countries should be 

increased. If forests are not managed and thinned, they become old and dense and 

consequently, there is an increasing amount of dead and drawn trees. The most serious 

practical problem is the thinning of young forests. If this procedure is neglected, the 

optimal, natural production capacity of forests may be lost. 


The opinions and views expressed in this paper are those of the author and do not 

necessarily represent those of the COST Action E4. The author would like to thank Dr. 

Declan Little who checked the language of this article and Ms. Anu Susi and Ms. Virpi 

Ahonen for their assistance in compiling the materials. 

REFERENCES 

ANGELSTAM, P. (1997) Landscape analysis as a tool for the scientific management of biodiversity. 

Ecological Bulletins 46: 140-170. Copenhagen 

ANGELSTAM, P. / PETTERSON, B. (1997) Principles of present Swedish forest biodiversity 

management. Ecological Bulletins 46: 191-203. Copenhagen 

ANNILA, E. (1998) Forest management and threatened species. Proceeding. Nordic symposium 

“New stand types in boreal forestry – ecological features and silvicultural consequences. 

February 10-11.1998, Vaasa. 

BORCHERS, J. (1997) Kosten und Nutzen einer “Naturland” - Zertifizierung, 1997, Wiesbaden 

BROEKMEYER, M.E.A. / VOS, W. (1993) Forest reserves in Europe: A review in Broekmeyer, 

M.E.A., Vos, W. and Koop, H. (eds.), 1993. European forest reserves. Proceedings of the 

European forest reserves workshop. PUDOC-DLO, Wageningen. p. 306.


BÜCKING, W. (1997) Naturwald, Naturwaldreservate, Wildnis in Deutschland und Europa (Natural 

Forests, Strict Forest Reserves, Wilderness Areas in Germany and in Europe) “Forst und Holz” 

Nr. 18:515-522 

BÜCKING, W. / OTT, W. / PUTTMANN, O. (1994) Geheimnis Wald. DWR- Verlag. 192 p. 

‘Der Wald hat ein Problem – Wir haben eine Lösung’ (1996) AFZ/der Wald 19:1066 

EDER, W. (1997) Naturnahe, nachhaltige Forstwirtschaft in Zentraleuropa. (Sustainable Close-tonature 

Forestry in Central Europe) “Forst und Holz” Nr. 20 .pp. 587-592 

ESSEEN, P-A. / EHNSTRÖM, B. / ERICSON, L. / SJÖBERG, K. (1997) Boreal forests. Ecological Bulletins 

46: 16-47. Copenhagen 

Forest Report by the Federal Government (1997) Bundesministerium für Ernährung, Landwirtschaft 

und Forsten. Bonn. 54 p. 

FRAMSTAD E. (1996) Biodiversity and sustainable Forestry in Norway – criteria and indicators. 

Sustainable Forest Management, TemaNord 1996:578. Copenhagen. pp. 89-94 

FRIVOLD, L. H. (1996) Considerations about sustainable silviculture in Norway. Sustainable Forest 

Management, TemaNord 1996:578. Copenhagen. pp. 158-166 

GEMMEL, P. (1996) Silviculture for sustainable forestry. Sustainable Forest Management, 

TemaNord 1996:578. Copenhagen. pp. 167-174 

Interim Report on the Follow-Up of the Second Ministerial Conference, Ministerial Conference on 

the Protection of Forests in Europe, 16-17, June 1993 in Helsinki. (1993) Ministry of 

Agriculture and Forestry. Helsinki. 255 p. 

JÄRVELÄINEN, V-P./ TIKKANEN, L. / TORVELAINEN, J. (1997) Metsien monimuotoisuuden 

turvaamisen taloudelliset vaikutukset. Summary: Economic effects of Preserving Forest 

Biodiversity in Finland. Helsingin yliopisto, taloustieteen laitos. Julkaisuja nro.15. 

Yksityismetsätalous. 96 p. 

KEENAN, R. J. / KIMMINS, J. P. (Hamish) (1993) The ecological effects of clear-cutting. Environ. 

Rev. 1: 121-144. 

KNUDSEN, J. E. (1996) Silvicultural methods and sustainability. Sustainable Forest Management, 

TemaNord 1996:578. pp. 184-194 

KOCH, G. / KIRCHMEIER, H. / REITER, K. / GRABHERR, G. (1997) Wie natürlich ist Österreichs Wald? 

Ergebnisse und Trends. Österreichische Forstzeitung 1/1997: 5-8. 

KORPEL, S. (1997) Totholz in Naturwäldern und Konsequenzen für Naturschutz und Forstwirtschaft. 

(Dead Wood in Natural Forest and Consequences for Nature Conservation and Forestry) “Forst 

und Holz” Nr. 21:619-624. 

KOUKI, J. (ed.). (1994) Biodiversity in the Fennoscandian boreal forests: natural variation and its 

management. Annales Zoologici Fennici 31.1. 

KUULUVAINEN, T. (1994) Gap disturbance, ground microtopography and the regeneration dynamics 

of boreal coniferous forests in Finland: a review. In Kouki, J. (ed.). Biodiversity in the 

Fennoscandian boreal forests: natural variation and its management. Annales Zoologici Fennici 

31 (1): 35-51 

LAWESSON, J. E. / BERTHELSEN, J. P. (1996) Biodiversity and sustainable forest management in 

Denmark. Sustainable Forest Management, TemaNord 1996:578. Copenhagen. pp. 95-102


LEHTONEN, H. (1997) Forest fire history in North Karelia: ecological approach. University of 

Joensuu. Faculty of Forestry, Research Notes 59. 23 p. 

LEIBUNDGUT, H. (1978) Über die Dynamik europäischer Urwälder. Allg. Forstz. 33, 686-690 

LEIBUNDGUT, H. (1982) Europäische Urwälder der Bergstufe. Bern, Stuttgart: Haupt. 

LEIBUNDGUT, H. (1986) Ziele und Wege der naturnahen Waldwirtschaft . Schweiz. Z. Forstwes. 

137: 245-250 

LEIBUNDGUT, H. (1989) Naturnahe Waldwirtschaft. Wilhelm-Münker-Stiftung 23. Siegen. 

MEYER, P. / SPELLMANN, H. (1997) Das Prozeßschutz-Konzept aus Sicht der Naturwaldforschung. 

AFZ/Der Wald 25:1344-1346 

Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe, 16-17 June 1993. (1993) Documents. 

Helsinki. The Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, 56 p. 

Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe, 16-17 June 1993. (1994) Criteria and 

Indicators for Sustainable Forestry. Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. Helsinki. 20 p. 

Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe, Progress report. (1996) Ministry of 

Agriculture, Rural Development and Fisheries, Lissabon. 62 p. 

Naturnähe Österreichischer Wälder. Bildatlas (1997) Bundesministerium für Land- und 

Forstwirtschaft. Wien. 39 p. 

Naturnahe Waldwirtschaft in Nordhein-Westfalen. (1997) Ministerium für Umwelt, Raumordnung 

und Landwirtschaft. 50 p. 

“Naturschutz im Wald” Generationenvertrag für Mensch und Natur. (1997) Deutscher Forstverein 

e. V., Niedenstein. 38 p. 

NIEMELÄ, H. / ARNKIL, R. (1997) Metsäluonnon hoito hakkuissa ja metsänuudistamisessa. Tapio, 

moniste. 

PARVIAINEN, J. (1996) Silviculture, management, techniques and sustainability. Sustainable Forest 

Management, TemaNord 1996:578. Copenhagen. pp. 140-146 

PARVIAINEN, J. / SEPPÄNEN, P. (1994) Metsien ekologinen kestävyys ja metsänkasvatusvaihtoehdot. 

Metsäntutkimuslaitoksen tiedonantoja 511. Vantaa. 110 p. 

PARVIAINEN, J. / SCHUCK, A. / BÜCKING, W. (1994) Forestry research on structure, succession and 

biodiversity of undisturbed and semi-natural forests and woodlands in Europe. In Paulenka, J. 

and Paule, L. (eds.). Conservation of Forests in Central Europe. Proceedings of the WWF 

Workshop held in Zwolen, July 7.-9.1994. Autora Publishers. pp. 23-30 

PARVIAINEN, J. / SCHUCK, A. / BÜCKING, W. (1995) A Pan-European system for measuring 

biodiversity succession and structure of undisturbed forests and for improving biodiversityoriented 

silviculture. In Bamsey, C.R. (ed.). Proceedings: Innovative Silviculture Systems in 

Boreal Forests, A symposium held in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, October 2-8.1994. 

Edmonton. Pp. 77-82 

PARVIAINEN, J. / BÜCKING, W. (1997) Strict forest reserves in Europe. Effort to enchange 

biodiversity and strengthen the research of natural forest in Europe “Concepts of naturalness”. 

Programme and Abstracts of the Conference: Naturalness and European Forests in Strasbourg, 

France. 26.-29.10.1997. p. 112


PARVIAINEN, J. / PÄIVINEN, R. / UUTTERA, J. / VARMOLA, M. (1998) The State of the art of forestry 

related research in natural forests in Finland. Manuscript for COST Action E4 Country Reports. 

COST Commission and European Forest Institute. 

PETERKEN, G. F. (1997) “Concepts of naturalness”. Programme and Abstracts of the Conference: 

Naturalness and European Forests in Strasbourg, France. 26.-29.10.1997. p. 112 

ROMANE, F. (1997) Some remarks on spontaneous forest succession in the Mediterranean Region. 

Invited paper.COST Action E4: Forest Reserves Research Network meeting in Pallas- 

Ounastunturi, Finland 30.-31.7.1997.Manuscript for COST Action European Forest Institute. 

Joensuu 

SCHMIDT-VOGT, H. (1991) Naturnahe Fichtenwirtschaft. Heft 31. Wilhelm-Münker-Stiftung. 55 p. 

SCHUCK, A. / PARVIAINEN, J. / BÜCKING, W. (1994) A review of approaches to forestry research on 

structure, succession and biodiversity of undisturbed and semi-natural forests and woodlands in 

Europe. Working paper 3. European Forest Institute. Joensuu. 62 p. 

SCHÜTZ, J.-PH. (1986) Charakterisierung des naturnahen Waldbaus und Bedarf an 

wissenschaftlichen Grundlagen. Schweiz. Z. Forstwes., 137:747 – 760 

STURM, K. (1993) Prozeßschutz – ein Konzept für naturschutzgerechte Waldwirtschaft. Zeitschrift 

für Ökologie und Naturschutz Nr. 2. Gustav Fischer-Verlag. pp.181-192 

THOMASIUS, H. (1992) Prinzipien eines ökologisch orientierten Waldbaus. Forstw.Clb. 111,Verlag 

Paul Parey, Hamburg und Berlin. pp. 141-155 

THOMASIUS, H. (1996) Geschichte, Anliegen und Wege des Waldumbaus in Sachsen. Schriftenreihe 

der Sächsischen Landesanstalt für Forsten, Waldumbau. Graupa. pp. 11-52 

TOIVONEN, H. (1996) Preserving biodiversity in Finnish forests- some botanical aspects.Sustainable 

Forest Management, TemaNord 1996:578. Copenhagen. pp. 78-88 

Unser Wald. Natur und Wirtschaftsfaktor zugleich. (1998) Bundesministerium für Ernährung, 

Landwirtschaft und Forsten. 51 p. 

WOLLSCHLÄGER, L. (1996) Totholzforschung in borealen Wäldern am Beispiel einer Fallstudie im 

Urwald Multiharju (National Park Seitseminen, Finland). Albert-Ludwigs-Universität, Freiburg. 

69 p.


Appendix 1 

SUMMARY OF THE COST E4 COUNTRY REPORTS 

PROTECTION OF FORESTS AND STRICT FOREST RESERVES 

The first forest reserves in Europe were established as early as the beginning of the 19th 

century. On the other hand, agriculture has been the predominant form of land use and 

natural forests, more often than not, have survived only in sites unsuitable for cultivation 

or where logging is unprofitable. This has also affected the ecological representatives of 

the resultant protected areas. Improving the representatives of forest reserves has been the 

primary aim of forest protection in recent times. 

Many of the countries engaged in the COST E4 Action have undertaken detailed 

programmes aimed at the protection of natural forest ecosystems. In addition, nature 

conservation legislation has recently been reformed in many countries and new forest 

reserves have been created. These countries include Austria, Belgium, Finland, Denmark, 

Germany, Hungary, Ireland, the Netherlands, Norway, Russia, Slovenia and Sweden. In 

general, it can be stated that the need to conserve natural forest ecotypes has been 

recognised and has lead to the establishment of forest and nature reserves in all of the 

participating COST E4 Action countries. 

Due to past, diverse land use pressures, natural forests area has decreased extensively in 

all European countries. However, few detailed nation-wide inventories on the naturalness 

of forests have been made. In several countries serious efforts have been made to increase 

forest area. In the majority of countries, forests have been altered significantly. Thus, 

European countries differ widely in relation to forest protection policy and its 

implementation. 

Short summary by countries 

Austria carried out an inventory of ‘forest naturalness’ in the 1990's. The Natural Forest 

Reserves Programme was initiated in 1995 and contributes to the implementation of an 

overall strategy of maintaining and improving forest biodiversity. The objective is to 

provide at least one Natural Forest Reserve for each natural forest community in the 

ecoregions. In addition to forest reserves, nearly one fifth of the total forest estate is 

classified as ‘protection forest’. These forests, which include protective, recreational or 

general economical functions, will be preserved through limited forest utilisation and 

specific silvicultural management operations. 

In Belgium the Law on Nature Protection enacted in 1973 promotes nature protection 

throughout the country. The three regions of Belgium, i.e. Brussels, Flanders and 

Wallonia, have their own separate administration and legislation for forestry and nature 

protection, and only in Flanders does there exist a specific Forest Decree. The Flemish 

Forest Decree, passed in 1990, has lead to the establishment of strict and specially 

managed forest reserves. In all three regions, forests are also protected in official nature 

reserves.


In Denmark both forest and protected forest areas have increased rapidly during the 

1990s. The Danish National Strategy for Natural Forests, published in 1994, outlines a 

medium-term strategy up to the year 2040. One of the goals is to preserve the remaining 

natural forests, in addition to traditional management systems. Protected forests should, 

by 2040, account for 10% of the total forest area. A network of strict forest reserves was 

established in 1994. 

In Finland large areas of forests are strictly protected under different categories of 

protected areas. The areas that are afforded legal protection are, as a rule, left untouched. 

The Revised Nature Conservation Act came into force in 1997. The basic network of 

reserves has been complemented by programmes aimed at the conservation of specific 

habitat types, i.e. 290 000 ha of old growth forests, herb rich forests, peatlands etc. The 

implementation of the EU NATURA 2000 programme will include previously 

unprotected forest areas. In addition, in a similar area of forest, restricted wood 

production occurs. Such areas include areas near the northern timber line and forests 

managed for recreation. 

About 1% of the forests in France are subject to various statutory nature conservation 

measures. These include Bio-reserves, which are areas of distinct ecological interest. Bioreserves 

in forests are divided into special and strict forest reserves. It is planned that the 

network of Bio-reserves would reach a total area of at least 30,000 ha by the end of the 

century. 

In Germany unmanaged, protected forests can be found in the network of strict Natural 

Forest Reserves, established for nature conservancy and scientific purposes, and in 

unmanaged areas of National Parks and the Biosphere reserves. Initially, the goal was to 

preserve the complete range of forest communities, but lately the need for larger areas has 

been recognised. Policy and management of protection areas varies widely in the 

16German states. 

In Greece a law introduced in 1971 added new categories of protected areas. The law 

includes forestry legislation that addresses faunal, floral and habitat protection. The 

categories important for forest protection are the strictly protected core areas and 

peripheral zones of National Parks and Aesthetic Forests. In the protected Natural 

Monuments category there are also valuable forest areas. 

In Hungary, legally protected forests occur in National Parks, Landscape Protection 

Areas, Nature Reserves or Forest Reserves. The Hungarian Forest Reserve Network was 

established in 1991. The reserves are forest areas set aside to monitor natural dynamics of 

forest ecosystems and thus, any intervention is prohibited. The areas are located within 

existing nature reserves. 

Ireland is at present launching two new categories of conservation areas: National 

Heritage Areas and Specific Areas for Conservation. These areas include all Nature 

Reserves and National Parks, as well as important semi-natural forests, which lie outside 

Parks and Reserves. These areas are situated both on state-owned and private lands. The 

total area of woodland within all these areas has not yet been fully quantified. 

In Italy during the 1970’s two lists of the most important biotopes were published. These 

lists have formed the basis for the subsequent establishment of a large network of Parks,


and State and Regional reserves. Most of the areas include a strict reserve core where 

access is only allowed for scientific purposes. 

In the Netherlands forests, where nature conservation is the main management goal, 

cover 30% of the total forest area, and only a fraction of these are Strict Forest Reserves. 

In many cases these areas are also managed for recreation, landscape or low level wood 

production. The Dutch Forest Reserves Programme was initiated in 1983, with the 

principal aim being scientific research. Although the areas are strictly protected, planted 

forests can also be included. Each forest reserve represents a specific site and forest type. 

Norway has large National Parks, mainly in the alpine regions. The first reserves 

consisted of either wilderness or typical biotypes. In the last decade, focus has increased 

on the conservation of biodiversity; e.g. productive forest areas in the lowlands, and 

special threatened areas in newly created ecosystems, e.g. scrub development. There are 

separate action plans designed to create a network of forest reserves for both broadleaved, 

deciduous forests and coniferous forests. An additional plan aims to protect 120 

km2 of productive coniferous forests before year 2000. 

Environmental legislation in Portugal has been reformed recently and contain new 

protection categories, in addition to the existing National parks and Nature reserves. 

Protected areas may contain special zones called ‘Strict Nature Reserves’, where human 

activities are restricted to scientific studies only. Semi-natural forest sites have also been 

included in the EU NATURA 2000 Network. 

The Russian network of reserves and other protection categories has been developed 

since the beginning of 20th century. A priority is to increase the area of forest reserves in 

the near future. In addition, a large area of forests belong to a special category, which is 

managed for specific purposes, such as pre-tundra forests, protected riverine zones, 

research and educational forests. 

Protected forests in Slovakia can be divided into protective forests with conservation and 

ecological functions, and special purpose forests, which are situated in watershed and 

emission areas. In addition to all other categories of protected areas, there are strictly 

protected forest reserves, many of which are part of National Parks, Biosphere reserves 

and protected landscapes. 

In Slovenia the expansion of forest reserve network to increase the representatives of 

forest biotypes began in the 1970’s. During the 1990s the area covered by the network has 

reached 1% of the total forest area. These reserves are strictly protected, with the principal 

aims being nature conservation and research. In addition to reserves, forests are also 

protected in protective forests, forests with subordinate productive functions, and in 

ecocells. 

In Spain many protected areas have been created during the last 15 years. The Natural 

Parks are the most important category of protected areas, however, they do not fully 

represent the range of natural forests in Spain. Stronger protection is afforded in small 

Nature Reserves, especially where they occur as special zones in National Parks and 

Natural Parks. Because these areas often have their own separate administration, there is 

no integrated information available about the total protected forest area. 

Sweden is currently revising the National Park system, where more emphasis will be put 

on regions outside the previously protected arctic-alpine mountain region. Natural forests


were intensively studied during the first nation-wide inventory of valuable forests in 

between 1972 and 1985. Most of the forests identified in the inventory were protected by 

1992 and a new programme is being implemented to systematically protect valuable 

forests. Generally, forest reserves, as well as other legally protected areas, are left to 

develop freely. 

In the United Kingdom, a new law enacted during the 1980s, afforded greater protection 

to conservation areas. Woodland is protected via a variety of mechanisms including the 

designation as Sites of Specific Scientific Interest (SSSI), ownership/management by 

conservation organisations, and local or national bodies sympathetic to nature 

conservation. SSSIs have been selected to represent the range of British woodland types 

and to conserve rare species. Many of these areas are managed as coppice, high forest, 

wood-pasture or minimum intervention areas according to the characteristics of the site 

and the management of the immediate, surrounding area. Nature conservation agencies 

aim to establish a series of minimum intervention sites, where no silvicultural treatments 

will be permitted. 

RESEARCH IN FOREST RESERVES AND NATURAL FORESTS 

Most countries participating in the COST E4 Action are determined to establish a 

representative network of strict forest reserves. These areas are scientifically important, 

particularly in countries where natural forests represent only a small proportion of the 

total forest area. Forest reserves are important for research on natural forest dynamics, 

especially in Central-European countries. In Scandinavia, natural forests outside reserves 

have been, and still are, very valuable for research. 

Traditional basic research on vegetation and structure of natural ecosystems has 

increased, particularly during the 1990s, with greater emphasis on silvicultural 

techniques, as a result of the current focus on sustainable forest management and the 

preservation of biodiversity in managed forests. Knowledge on the dynamics of natural 

forests is very relevant to current and future forest management. Due to the demand for 

more ecologically-oriented silviculture, many countries have launched research 

programmes focusing on biodiversity and/or ecological research in forest reserves. 

Short summary by countries 

In Austria, research to date on natural forests has focused mainly on the survey, 

documentation and evaluation of forest structure-related data. The main activities on 

natural forests at present, are linked to the Natural Forest Reserves Programme. A 

network of observation plots has been established in forest reserves. 

In Belgium forest research initially focused on productivity and the potential of exotic 

species. A more ecologically-oriented research programme has developed since the 

1980s. Current research topics include, ecology of old forest plant species, evaluation of 

endangered species, methodology for the quantification of biodiversity and basic 

inventories of forest reserves. 

In Denmark a basic research and a long term monitoring programme in natural forests 

have been formulated. Although forest dynamics have not previously been studied 

widely, pollen analysis has been used to study vegetation dynamics. Studies in natural


forests are considered important in the process of developing nature-based forest 

management, especially as a result of extensive reforestation programmes. 

In Finland natural forests have been studied since the 1920s when, at that time, basic 

knowledge of natural forests dynamics was gathered. Up to the 1990‘s there has been 

little research activity specifically on natural forests, although results of forest 

management studies have often been compared to undisturbed forests. In recent years 

several research programmes concerned with natural forests have been established 

focusing on fire ecology, forest dynamics and structures of natural forests. The most 

important permanent plot network in natural forests was established in 1993 by Metla 

including more than 250 different natural forests. 

Strict forest reserves have been established in France to study and observe forest 

dynamics and environments, untouched by man. In each region, a scientific committee 

controls the inventory and scientific programme within the reserves. 

In Germany, most research activities have focused on vegetation studies: stand type, 

stand structure, vegetation mapping and plant inventories. Recently, faunistic studies have 

been initiated. In addition, an initiative to implement a monitoring programme in 

unmanaged beech ecosystems has been suggested. Research often focuses on the 

dynamics of natural forest reserves for the benefit of silviculture in production forests. 

Ongoing research includes standard surveys of permanent plots or core areas in forest 

reserves. 

In Greece the Forest Research Institute of Athens established a large number of 

experimental plots throughout the country in the 1960s. The control plots on unmanaged 

areas provide data on natural forest development. Recently, the creation of a network of 

plots in forest reserves has been discussed. At present, a number of studies are focusing 

on silvicultural research in natural forests. 

Traditional forest research in Hungary has focused on either floristic, faunistic or 

succession in managed oak woods. Presently, a network of forest reserves in natural 

forests is being established for research purposes. A standard monitoring scheme is being 

planned for these areas, and systematic research has already been ongoing in some 

reserves since the 1980s. 

A number of research projects concerning various aspects of oakwood ecology were 

initiated in Ireland during the 1970s. In general, there is a paucity of published stand 

structure data for Irish woodlands. Presently, a comprehensive programme of monitoring 

and scientific research is being undertaken in a semi-natural oakwood, which serves as the 

flagship site of a proposed Irish Ecological Monitoring Network. Palynological and soil 

research techniques have also been traditionally employed to study the development of 

natural forests. 

The Italian Forest Research Institute established a research programme on forest areas of 

peculiar interest in 1952. Of the network of permanent plots some still remain. The aim 

was to study the evolutive trends of the main forest ecosystems. Recently, new research 

areas have been established within several Natural Parks. Phytosociological methods are 

being used to classify forest ecosystems in order to characterise their dynamics. In 

addition, the impact of recreation on the protected areas is being assessed


Research-related goals of the Forest Reserve Programme in the Netherlands are 

inventory and analysis of spontaneous forest processes. For these purposes, permanent 

plots have been established. The information gathered is also important for the 

implementation of the Dutch National Long-term Forestry Plans, which aim at more 

natural forest-oriented management. 

Few research projects have been carried out in Norway, in nature reserves, though 

considerable research has been done in natural and managed forests outside of reserves. 

This work has focused on forest history, utilisation and disturbance of forests, forests 

structure and dynamics, fragmentation, multiple use of forests etc. Natural forests will be 

the focus of research, – for example a current, large research project on biodiversity, – 

although no project is specifically targeted on forests reserves. 

There is no special research programme focused on protected areas in Portugal. The most 

common studies have dealt with vegetation dynamics. Since fire is a major cause for 

concern in Portugal, issues related to fire prevention and vegetation recovery after fire 

have been studied in protected areas. In addition, faunistic studies of endangered species 

have been carried out. 

Almost all forest research in the Russian taiga zone has been carried out in natural forests 

subject to various forms of disturbance. During the early years of the 20th century, 

information on forest resources was collected, a classification system of forest types was 

created and a permanent sample plot experiment was established. Presently, State Forest 

Reserves and National Parks have their own research programmes. Other institutions 

study natural taiga forests and natural forest are included in a number of other studies. 

Forest biodiversity and the effects of climate change are the current focus areas. 

Research on the structure of natural forests has a long tradition in Slovakia. Current 

research of untouched forests can be classified into two categories: (1) detailed 

investigations of selected virgin forests, i.e. structure and development, growth and yield, 

regeneration processes and life cycle and (2) studies on anthropogenic impacts on forests, 

i.e. regeneration under different degrees of pollution stress, changes in soil chemical 

composition and physiological processes measured by dry mass extracts. 

During the earliest phase of forest research in Slovenia the primary focus was toward 

stand structure and dynamics. Subsequently, research on stand structure continued and a 

new network of permanent sample plots was established. Since the 1980s, more emphasis 

has been placed on an interdisciplinary approach and on comparative research between 

forest reserves and managed forests, which have developed under similar edaphic 

conditions. 

Nature reserves in Spain are not monitored in a co-ordinated fashion, although a pilot 

monitoring programme has been carried out in one of the National parks. Most work on 

the ecology of forests has been done in a limited number of the various forest types extant 

in Spain. However, a lot of research has been done on helm oak forests. Other forest types 

have been studied from a biogeochemical point of view. 

Swedish Nature Reserves are monitored in permanent plots within the National Forest 

Inventory, i.e. measurements extended to reserves in 1994, and in the national network of 

integrated monitoring plots established in the late 1970s. A lot of research has been 

carried out on silvicultural methods, especially in experimental forests, which were


established nearly 70 years ago throughout the country. Scientific research has not been 

systematically directed to, or carried out in the Natural Parks. Recently, new projects 

concerning threatened species, indicators of biodiversity and lichens as environmental 

indicators have been initiated 

In the United Kingdom research has been carried out on natural processes or on species 

specifically associated with minimum intervention management, in addition to direct 

studies of minimum intervention areas themselves. For example, historical and 

palaeoecological studies of past species composition have been done as well as studies on 

woodland management, succession, species indicative of old growth conditions, 

comparative studies of protected and managed forests, and the structure and dynamics of 

canopy, shrub layer and ground floral zones. 

Specifications for the statistics of the forest area and forest 

protection 

The headings in Table 1 are explained in more detail as follows: 

1. Forest and other wooded land, area of forests 

– see explanations as separate page 

– use national definition 1 / or FAO 1992 definition (indicate which one is used) 

2. Naturalness (degree of human influence on forests) 

a) natural forests = virgin forests, primeval forests, untouched, old growth forests 

– original forest cover (only natural regeneration can occur) 

– uninfluenced by human activities for specified time 

b) semi-natural forests = consist of tree species which occur naturally on a specific 

site 

– only natural regeneration (no planting, no seeding) 

– human influence allowed (traditional uses like selection cutting, coppicing, 

slash and burn cultivations) 

– mainly multipurpose or production forests at present 

c) altered forests = no more necessarily original forest composition (mainly 

production forests) 

– planted / sowing after cutting, artificial regeneration 

– includes also exotic tree species, or native species out of their natural range 

– afforestation of abandoned agricultural land 

3. Strict forest reserves = strictly protected forests (left for free development without 

human influence) Note! This is the most important fragment for COST E4. 

– total area in hectares 

– number of reserves 

– average size / or range 

4. Total area of forest reserves = different categories of protected forests, forest areas 

outside of normal forest operation (management) 

1 Definitions: see more detailed in: SCHUCK, A., PARVIAINEN, J. and BÜCKING, W. 1994. A review of 

approaches to forestry research on structure, succession and biodiversity of undisturbed and semi-natural 

forests and woodlands in Europe. European Forest Institute, Working papers 3. 62 p.


– mainly protected forest areas of rare and vulnerable ecological / biodiversity 

value 

– not forest areas for landscape management 

– not forest areas for protection of erosion, water, avalanches

170 Strict forest reserves in Europe


Factors affecting the comparability of the forest area data 

This review is based on KÖHL, M., PÄIVINEN, R. TRAUB, B. and MIINA, S.: European 

Forestry Information and Communication System. Reports on forestry inventory and 

survey systems. European Commission 1997. Volume 2. Comparative study, pp. 1265- 

1322. 

One major cause of differences is the definition of forest (Table 2.). For instance, the 

Scandinavian countries define the forest land using the productivity and tree growth as the 

defining factor. In the most European countries the definition of forest land can be based 

on crown cover combined with tree height. The FAO definition requires, that area 

classified as forest should have a crown cover of 10% and a height of trees of 5 meters. 

Figure 1 shows the variation of the growing stock volume depending on the density and 

structure of the forests classified according to the forest land area. 

Also other definitions are used differently in different countries due to their management 

practices and land use history. The most of the Southern European countries have large 

areas of shrubland and coppice forests and only a few amount of high forests. The 

naturalness of forests is often described with different classifications or the definitions 

have different meaning. Only few countries have made a nation-wide inventory where 

naturalness of the forests has been evaluated. 

The statistics available varies as well, because often the data is collected with different 

methods. The accuracy of the data can alternate also because of the inventory methods 

used. Exact information does necessarily not exist about all specific subjects and 

approximations have to be used. For example, the precise area of forests in the nature 

reserves is often not known. 

Figure 1: The total volume of the forests in some European countries classified according 

to the forest area.

172 Strict forest reserves in Europe

VIRGIN FORESTS AND FOREST RESERVES IN ... - Natura 2000

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?